I would like to add some point to this discussion. Sailfish OS promoted as “The mobile OS with built-in privacy”. Maybe indifferent users might prefer Android over SFOS.
Just two random links to think about:
1 Like
While sympathizing zlutor’s monetization view to an extent, the devs need to make living if they are to be developing. Yet, if ads were to be introduced into sfos, why would anyone bother with it any more? To have a sailfish phone, first you are limited to very few device choices, so few that sometimes the number has been zero if you want a new device. Then you need to bother with flashing, and in the end you have given away some functionality (drivers, some banking apps, etc.). All this I see as a cost of ad-free, tracking-free, shit-free mobile experience. If this is taken away, it is all the same to go with google. Why bother, if I end up the same?
Unfortunately, I do not have a good suggestion for monetizing the dev effort, but I doubt that pestering users with ads will be the answer. Perhaps some sort of sfos subscription, which is then divvied between jolla and devs based on app downloads from shop, or such.
Having ads visible does not (necessarily) means tracking users. Especially not to the extent Google&co does…
what advantage SFOS could provide when there are ads? Exactly the no-tracking built into the OS itself in contrast to Apple&Google…
I bet you see ads on yout TV, too - and you are not tracked there. (actually it is less-and-less true for TVs nowadays but you see what I mean)…
of course, it means less targeting accurancy but so what…
not to mention because there are certain level of tarhlgetting and it could be quite ok with anonimized data, too…
I pay my bread, my water, my apples.
I paid for phone apps / PC programs and e.g. SFOS licenses.
I dislike to stay online for nothing too.
As well, I dislike bandwidth waste for nothing.
I can understand that some need adds but I will personally NOT use any app that contains add and doesn’t work offline for that unique reason.
[OT]
That recalls me I wanted to make donations to some authors here.
Gonna do that right away.
The donation process could be simplified. That would be a good think.
Sometimes, I want to donate but I abandon because the process is complicated/long.
Donation must be stronger than our lazinesses.
[/OT]
2 Likes
If the ad is not built static into the app, but retrieved from somewhere, the user is tracked. So, nonintrusive advertising would require the developer to release new version of an app every time when new ads are introduced.
Then, it is too often that the ads camouflage themselves as some app controls, like an ‘Ok’ button that looks exactly like an ‘Ok’ button in the app itself. The ad provided button then launches browser or some other nasty shit, if you end up selecting it. This is so often in the android world and I would hate it here.
Then, even if the ad is distinct and easy to differentiate from the app ui, and is easy to close, it is too often that new ads pop every 10 seconds. The nastiest apps then combine these two traits.
5 Likes
So, let’s forbid knives because one cuts throats instead of slicing bread… 
yes, you are right, there are cases you mentioned but it is not necessarily the case. But there are.more ethical behaviour out there, too…
when you are served with ads it does not imply that you, personally, are tracked. It.depends on the ad.provider - here Qt and.its.ad serving partners).
if Qt Ad Platform fetches ad from ad server with anonimized data, you cannot.be tracked…
of course, I do not know how.it works actually but it is doable. And Jolla should ensure anonimization takes place, if ported to.SFOS…
I read somewhere that a big addition of anonymized data can point pretty precisely to an user or an user category.
Even if data is anonymized, we(I?) are(am?) tried of being anonymized and analysed and quantified for “quality purposes” or other “studies”.
@zlutor, nothing against you but is that honestly thought/said?
I, in contrary, have the feeling that ads are served by me.
Also, I consider any kind of advertising as a waste of attention, energy and time.
Ad is expensive.
All those efforts are being paid by the final user for…? → For convincing the same final user to buy something.
Advertising is also a vehicle for models and ideologies which often promote non-constructive and non-progressive conceptions.
People became tired of being seen as children, being told what to buy, what to like or dislike.
SFOS privacy is not only the absence of personal data leaks. (output)
SFOS privacy is also the peace in my private sphere. (input)
I want to be left in peace in my phone and computer.
No constant notifications, reminders, ads, warnings, antivirus, anti-all, kindly disguised threats … no intrusion, just peace.
Friends and family, people, music, art, readings… Definitely not advertising. We are grown and know what we want to buy or not.
If it can’t be sold, it perhaps needs to be improved, not given for free with crap-trap.
@zlutor, I don’t respect or dis-respect your position. I don’t judge. I ignore your motivations but recognize them as a right. I sometimes work in advertising myself.
I only express my personal taste as user who needs respect for his very personal places and moments which are, yes, today, also in a phone.
6 Likes
Personally, i do not like ads, and if i cannot avoid them i try not to pay attention (pure waste of time), in addition i try to avoid buying products that I’ve seen in ads.
I can also understand that ads can bring revenue to app developers, maybe sfos too. That will be fine for me providing i have the option to disable ads.
I am also not interested to use apps with ads, i would prefer to pay for an app and not having ads. So please give me the choice.
2 Likes
That’s exactly why I installed SFOS earlier.
I don’t want any ads and I accept that there are fewer/less apps. As with Android, Jolla would be overwhelmed with pointless fart apps that only have one goal: make money with users. What quality would you expect? Take a look at the Jolla store. In my eyes 98% garbage and not in maintenance. Dealing fairly with advertising is an illusion.
Maybe someone else remembers the Blackberry store? Almost 10,000 useless apps flooded the store by 1 development company. All generated by a bot and dumped into the store. With Google, that number is much bigger. Pearls are hard to find. Why should Jolla be any different?
I totally understand developers wanting to make money, but honestly, a few thousand users isn’t enough. SFOS is not an attractive marketplace. So far, most apps have been contributed by enthusiasts.
By the way. I know many users whose main applications are adblockers and firewalls. This prevents eye and brain cancer, as well as harassment and security holes.
2 Likes
I see your point too - I myself am.fedup wit ads-n-ads apps…
look at one.of.our apps how.we make ut: one-and-none: BrainTrainR Pro (for.Android, as a demonstration of a concept).
is it acceptable by you or no-go, still?
“a few thousands users” - well, to some extent, yes.
but without apps, this will be a niche product forever.
do you remember early apps aving downloads in range of 50k when.there was hype and Jolla device(s)?
I’d like to try it but have not triggered android apps installation yet.
Do I understand what you mean: one ad and then the app runs without ads?
I personally wouldn’t like it, I am afraid.
If I’d be interested into the app, I’d pay some € for it.
How many € does one of these apps bring back for one person? Seeing one ad, once will not make me spend so much money for the brand’s ad, I guess. Some cents? Hard to figure.
But this amount would be the price to pay for the app, is that right?
Yes, that is the model: single [optional] ad at the.beginning and that’s it for.that run…
not that much per instance but was proven to be OK for backing the development as hobby for 3 guys if having ~2000 ad shown per day (from all of our apps).
especially if 10-20-30% is from US. European ads (UK, France, even Germany) pays surprisingly low compared to US or Japan in general. Of.course, it.depends on ad campaign spendings but in general…
I understand.
Well, if it can help developers to live or earn some money, I can maybe not stand against that practice.
But I will not use such apps for myself and would change OS (or quit mobile phone?) if it happens that Os’s apps become in-vaded/fected by ads.
1 Like
Just plugging this thread here: Block ads on Sailfish 4.4
If apps become infested with ads, people will find a way around it. Please don’t ruin SFOS.
An often repeated argument is that ads are to help (hobby) developers. In my opinion (I don’t have statistics to back this) income from apps and ads is too much of a hassle for tax reasons and because of fees, etc. for normal people. Even accepting donations is quite hard to setup in a legal and transparent way.
Ads will not support individual developers who build apps in their spare time - yet these are the people who keep SFOS going.
Also, ads will not attract big businesses to suddenly build apps for a tiny niche market like SFOS. Neither paid apps nor adware will solve the problem of missing banking apps, login apps, chat apps, … that are only available for Android/iOS.
As others have said above, the only thing ads will attract is spammy adware. There might be a few apps that use ads responsibly, actually helping a constructive developer - but is it worth it? If they have the means to legally get income from ads, they may as well leave users the choice and accept donations.
Leave users the choice; forcing ads is just detrimental to everyone involved.
4 Likes
I do not want to comment on taxation (yes, it is pain in the back) but give the option for ones take it…
please, think a bit bigger thane SFOS as a nieche product. Having this ad platform.supported, SFOS can be OS used for ad kiosk (billboards), “smart” (public) coffe machines, vending machines, whatnot - wireless communication is in place, monetization option is in place…
or, it will remain something like it is: a niche, filantropic, always-in-danger playground…
Good point here. This is one pitfall of SFOS ecosystem in current state, the lack of those native apps, where the money is made elsewhere and the app is simply supporting the core business. Like banks, streaming services, online shopping, etc., most do not bother to build SFOS native app. I am sorry if this rant goes off topic, as these apps by their nature would not require the ad platform.
A good example is S-mobiili, a local loyalty program cum electronic receipt app, which does not have native app and the android version stopped working a while ago. It would be nice if SFOS market would grow to a size deemed worthwhile by e.g. banks to build a native app. It should not require too much if they already have the android version in any case.
(I don’t criticise taxation - strong progressive taxes are important - but I say properly filing taxes for marginal, irregular, and small incomes like donations or “ad revenue” is a lot of tedious work.)
Well, I don’t think things like coffee machines are the right place for a mobile phone OS anyway. What would actually help SFOS as a system as well as every app developer, would be an update to Qt 5.15. Adding another API like an “ad platform” just adds to Jolla’s maintenance workload and will make an update to Qt even more unlikely.
In my opinion, thinking bigger for SFOS would mean focussing on future-proofing the system to make sure it survives even if Jolla (or any successor) goes downhill. This requires a) as much openness as possible (lipstick, Silica, default apps etc. under GPL), b) focus on keeping core parts up-to-date (updating Qt), c) creating a contractual framework to make sure the system stays open (like the KDE-Qt agreement; maybe this? https://forum.sailfishos.org/t/interest-to-create-a-cooperative/10799).
Adding more native support for ads diverts attention from more important issues.
I don’t share this view at all ;).
1 Like
I don’t think it’s off-topic. It actually provides a good example why adding an ad platform would be trying to solve a problem that’s not there. Adding ads won’t bring enough (if any) “growth” to get major businesses interested but it will create lots of spam.
2 Likes
Yes, the spam-apps, the menace of the android world. If we look at the Google Play store, there are 300 different flashlight apps, whose only differences are the app icon and the placement of the adverts on the screen. If I do not have that available in the SFOS world, I do not think I am missing much. Also, I think you are right in the statement that having the spam-apps will not help in the case of missing e.g. banking app, as why would Nordea want to advertise Danske Bank inside their own app or vice versa. 
1 Like