Oh so I’m not the only one who ran into this issue.
If a topic looks like it’s getting overheated, it may get switched to slow mode (in this case 15 mins delay between posts) to avoid it escalating. As I was following this conversation I switched it to slow mode. If others think a topic is getting overheated, you’re welcome to message me and I’ll make a judgement about it.
If you’d like to discuss the merits or otherwise of slow mode, it would be best to make a separate topic, e.g. in the Site Feedback section.
6 Likes
Thank you for the clarification. But with it being on OpenRepos, I thought it would be available through StoreMan?
Or is that not how it works? Are there things on OpenRepos that are not in StoreMan but can still be installed ‘manually’?
Microtube is available in storeman.
What I miss in the discussion about paid applications and the lack thereof on the Jolla Store, and on Sailfish in general, is the fact that on both Android and iOS, the most installed apps by far are those that don’t cost any money at all. Most of them are made by big companies (not coming to Sailfish), governments (not coming to Sailfish) and some other smaller-but-useful stuff like file browsers (already available on Sailfish).
Then, the most installed paid applications are also all made by big companies (not coming to Sailfish).
The most installed games are those that don’t cost anything, either made by big companies (not coming to Sailfish) or viral successes (could technically come to Sailfish), and the most installed paid games are made by big companies (not coming to Sailfish) or are knockoffs of games made by big companies.
Therefore, from a user’s perspective, I don’t see how adding support for paid applications would have any significant impact on the availability of native Sailfish apps at all. The only way for Sailfish to become bigger and get more applications is to be bigger and have more applications.
@nthn
Yes, this.
Also, as an author of a moderately successful app… it took years for it to get into a state where it would have possibly been deserving of having a price.
And my motivations were not and are still not in that direction.
I think i have had a whole handful of people donating (and that one crazy repeat donator), still makes me happy each time.
Trying to shed some light on what you might be seeing.
If this was the case, how would people know to check back?
For me it always fell under that “i don’t need an app for this” - even with the old browser YouTube worked fine, now it works great.
I’d say the total user base is really hard to gauge. SeaPrint has only managed to accumulate some 1600 active users, but the recent influx of new users to the forum has also been quite noticeable.
And for completeness - i think i have yet to have a single breakage on mine.
(Despite at least some shenanigans on my end)
I wanted to argue that my apps are well made but this… it took microtube like 4 years or so to get to this point. I, single person, can only do as much.
probably cause my apps do things never seen before heh
I honestly can’t find it 
Searching for ‘youtube’ gives a long list of applications, only some of which seem actually related to youtube, but no ‘microtube’.
This is on Xperia 10 III btw. Am I missing something?
BTW what apis are missing to be able to get Microtueb in the official store?
oh boy… too many, i don’t even care about jolla’s junkyard
There’s still an issue from like 5 years ago that apps can’t have dependencies that jolla did not resolve for morsender
When I select PicoPlayer and then ‘More by Mister_Magister’ I get a long list of applications, but MicroTube is not one of them.
From both a user’s and a developer’s perspective, I don’t see how adding support for paid applications could have any NEGATIVE impact on anything on this platform. So why not just try and see if it helps or not. It definitely won’t make anything worse than it is.
I guess that one doesn’t contradict the other. Having support paid apps in no way means that one could not continue releasing free apps or accepting donations. So, again, what drawbacks of having support for paid apps there can be?
I guess that each developer has its own motivations. Some do it for fun, some do it for money, some do it for fun but wouldn’t mind getting some money for it. At least for some, it’s definitely an incentive, not a repeller.
I’ve had some 25 paid apps on BB10. Most of them (excluding the ones which were specific to unique BB10 platform features) could easily be ported to SFOS. I’ve been planning to do it for a long time, and release them for free, but somehow I could never find the time and will to polish them to the state that (being quite pedantic) I’d consider sufficient for public release. But with an incentive of some possible monetization (e.g. even just a few bucks to add to the planned expense on the 10 III) I’d definitely force myself to eventually port them. So it’d be around 20-25 new apps from me, for a good start. And then some more, as I keep making new stuff for my own use, of which at least some are worth sharing with others. Well, that’s it.
1 Like
Indeed.
And i was not arguing against paid apps (i’m all for it!), i was adding arguments against that it would somehow “solve the app situation” on the wider scale. Only so many use-case can be handled by indie developers. That is not the same as that wouldn’t benefit from it at all.
too bad i guess, not my fault
You can download it directly with Browser: Microtube | OpenRepos.net — Community Repository System
As you are on X10III, you need the aarch64 variant of the newest version (at the bottom of the list).
1 Like
I don’t think it would solve the situation, either. Because it is very late (too late?) and some serious opportunities had already been wasted (2013-2014 when Symbian Qt developers were looking for a new platform for them, and then on a much smaller scale 2018-2020 when BB10 developers were doing the same). Sadly, Jolla didn’t even turn head in that direction.
Anyway, while it surely wouldn’t solve the situation, it might at least more or less improve it.
So, I would really love to hear from Jolla what are the TRUE reasons of their so apparent reluctance to start supporting paid apps. They’ve got a well working payment processing system in their shop, so it’s not that. They’ve got a very strict application verification in their store, so it’s not the risk that they might be selling something harmful. So, is the whole problem really just about not willing to spend some euros on commercial Qt licencing?
Holy ****, indeed! I’ve had to add a counter to onAccepted to only react to the second signal. Let me guess, for how long it’s been broken like that? Years?
Is there a bug report related to this? I couldn’t find one. If no, could you or @Mister_Magister create one?
It’s not my problem to fix jolla’s broken software when they don’t even bother to test their stuff.