Well you are at least right on one point.
2 Likes
Yes, that is amazing, indeed!
And I am so happy that such a small team has achieved so much - and that they can continue sailing. Thank you for not giving up, sailors! I wish you all the best and wait in the harbour for all your releases yet to come.
I guess that the about-page of Jolla.com already shows a major part of the team:
Now, we may guess who is who 
7 Likes
I understood it this way: Jolla Oy is cancelled by court, so Jolla Oy does no more exist after the change. The new Jollyboys is founded new as a successor but is a completely new company but with a lot of the former people/staff, and therefore the new name and new registration. Am I wrong?
Talking about the company name: how much sailors are fitting in a dinghy (i.e. jolla?). Does the company name limit the team size?
I count 13 people on the image. 13 is a good number! I wish you all good luck!
Live long and prosper!
7 Likes
Innovation is tricky even more tricky than business.
Supposing that we want embrace this path which seems counter intuitive because there is no value in adopting a platform that has not been designed for the smartphones market and never succeed in this market in any declination.
Accepting that because this HUGE barrier there is a HUGE opportunity behind, which makes sense.
The most effective approach is:
- do not reinvent the wheel - move to a Linux distribution just supported by its community
- do not create further barriers - choose such distribution for binary compatibility
- do not create useless stress - among those distributions choose one that uses RPM
These three points brings us to the conclusion that SFOS refactoring is necessary and it is the premise to keep it updated with as less as possible effort.
However, there are still in place 2 more HUGE issues:
- bring value for a customers niche to support a business and/or intercept interested developers
- deal with the closed source blobs which mainly are about hardware firmware and its support
This requires an architectural change of the system in order to introduce another PoV into this sector.
A recovery image was missing, clearly. This lack has been fulfill. At least, I did.
A recovery image is an essential tool for everything above but also a tool that have brought in another PoV, and this is its the most of its value. Because another PoV was more essential than a tool.
The first part of this PoV has been presented in SFSCON 2023 speech but the slides contains it in full.
The RedFish OS business presentation completes the picture about creating value for customers and which customers.
You might like it or not. You might like me or not. You might think that is enough or not. But that’s it.
Well, its hard to know for certain as none of us here have access to the details. My guess at what happened is that Jolla Oy became insolvent (bankrupt) and went through a bankruptcy process overseen by the Finnish court system. A new company (‘Jollyboys Oy’) was created by the management of the old and a court mandated process was then followed. This likely liquidated the assets of Jolla Oy, some or all of which were then sold to Jollyboys Oy. The proceeds of the sale would then be used to pay off Jolla Oy’s creditors. I have no idea what the valuation of the assets were that were sold to Jollyboys Oy, or what any non-shareholder investors received back as a percentage of their investment. I think its likely that Jollyboys Oy would have had to have paid at least something for them. Jolla Oy will exist until this process is complete and will then be likely dissolved as a company. Since the Russian shareholders of Jolla Oy will not be shareholders of Jollyboys Oy this process effectively removes their ownership interest in Sailfish and App support - assuming those were two of the assets that transferred to the new company. So, a long way of saying you are probably right
1 Like
Yesterday I have checked and it still booked into Finland company registry, not in a closed state but still into a debt state.
The main problem is that the hardware platform is not standardized. We have to chase for usable hardware while the PC / X86 / X64 platform is an industry standard. One hasn’t to laboriously unlock a computer to install Linux on it, this works easy and reliable on every computer. But we have to fiddle around with a tiny selection of phones to install another OS than Android. PCs are open, phones are generally closed systems.
With the restructuring I really hope and await more openness to other manufacturers additionally to Sony. At least Volla and Fairphone, but the more the better.
1 Like
You are confusing the legal status of an incorporated company as a legal entity (person) in its own right with the people or organisations who are shareholders of that company which are different, and separate, legal entities. It is the legal entity of the company that is liable for its debts (and credits), not the shareholders even though they are part owners of the company. That is the whole point of a limited liability company. Once the shareholders have paid for their shares in full they have no further liability for any company debts except in a very small number of very specific legal circumstances, none of which occur very often.
3 Likes
It is a wrong claim. Fragmentation is so high that it does not even exist a referring HW platform for each smartphone vendors. Very small smartphone producer can claim to have such platform: fairphone, pinephone, murena, librem, someone else?
However, it does not exist because the revenues-market dynamics. The good news that offering a new way in doing business and collect revenues, the fragmentation will be reduced in time because it is a cost for everyone. For someones is a way to collect revenues. Hence: fragmentation costs + its benefits is still positive. Offer them a way to cut fragmentation costs and increase revenues, and they will embrace it as soon as they started to understand it.
More or less, the innovation lays here. Whatever, ASOP or CentOS.
Companies are legal entities. Therefore they can own something, like humans.
Le società di capitali hanno «personalità giuridica»: sono cioè, per lo Stato, dei soggetti giuridici distinti dalle persone dei soci . È quindi la società, e non il singolo socio, ad essere titolare dei diritti e degli obblighi che nascono dallo svolgimento dell’attività.
You have been confused but this law trick which is not very recent to be honest.
One more tip:
- the first company with shares has been invented in Genoa during the middle-age, centuries ago
- the first insurance / escrow deposit (earliest commercial bank) was invented in Genoa almost in the same time
- the first modern bank with common customers allowance was invented in Florence, a little later.
Never challenge a Genovese about business and trading! 
I am a Genovese and we do business and trading for living not for arguing with someone else like lawyers do! You lose, your client lose. A Gevose lose, s/he lose. A damn HUGE difference!
Yes.
No.
Its not a trick and I am not confused. This is what I do for a day job - I am a lawyer specialising in contract and tort law. Are you?
5 Likes
So … No, then (20 chars).
Yes and yes (and 20 chars)
I expect this is accurate and fits the facts much more than various other people pretending they understand the business. It’s painful for me to read and it must be worse for Steve_Everett.
Indeed, aside from the management buyout, I guessed this was what was going on a week or so after Jolla went into administration. The small invoice was a bit of a giveaway (€140k not €50k).
Rostelcom (or Putin’s inner circle) knew something Jolla could only guess at – that Aurora was going to be Russia’s governmental OS [perhaps including for military hardware].
I’d assume the sale was open to other buyers. And I’d be curious what the mandated share price is.
4 Likes
For sure, it was not a matter of money.
I do not understand something, maybe someone here can explain. If Rostelecom as debtor of Jolla was decoupled of the international payments system, could not even if they wanted to, to pay the debts. Moreover, how the new owners pay Rostelecom if payments to Russia are not possible? Is this not stealing?
2 Likes
Anyway let’s remember Jolly cooperation quote by Solaire on Dark Souls game series haha
Anyway I am super happy that Jolla is secured again, the Finnish Court solved this Russian dilemma and ongoing issue that was preventing the company to be in business for time period.
I mean, take a french company that wants to be in business with Jolla… knowing that behind them was 30% of Russian stakes.
Finally it’s again all finnish, from what I’ve understand, and has this subsidiary Seaferix, that will concentrate in vehicles OEM software.
If you think about it, it’s the way BlackBerry went with IoT and vehicles, but they decided to leave mobile OS development… and yet, Jolla managed to profit 5million EUR! That’s a great success for a little enterprise! Congrats to Jolla!
1 Like
Rostelecom was not a debtor of Jolla. Rostelecom was partly owner of Jolla, which was a debtor with respect to its own lawyers. I oversimplified saying Rostelecom was “a debtor”, meaning that being a shareholder of a debtor it’s not on the side which has to get money, but on the side that has to fork out (limited to its own company share).
1 Like