Yes, “the two companies [failed] find a common ground”, as it was indicated (by sailors at TJC, IIRC), that many years ago there have been talks.
Also I wholeheartedly reply with “Yes, they should focus.” to the very first words of this thread: “Should Jolla focus […] ?”, hence they shall not support a Fairphone, if they are not convinced of the benefits of doing so.
Fairphone 5 uses an IOT chip instead of usual smartphone one, Qualcomm guarantees multiple Android upgrades, and even Linux support: QCM6490 5G mmWave, LTE, Bluetooth & Wi-Fi 6 combination chipset and AP for IoT applications
Sure, it is not official Open Devices Project, but this could mean FP5 much more viable than any previous device of theirs.
Only chance to make that happen would probably be fairphone licensing and preinstalling SfOS on their phones. Otherwise the userbase would most likely be way too small for Jolla to even think about supporting fairphones officially.
Maybe it would be helpful to make a poll within the fairphone community if there is any interest in an alternative OS at all, and if there is, to urge Fairphone to license SfOS.
Interesting, are we going to see pinephone/tabs with this chipset? Linux drivers with LTS sounds great
I think it would be good but it is a lost case. Years ago there have been talks between the two without any result. Now /e/OS is working with Fairphone.
Actual Linux LTS support actually be just that.
(Though focusing and doing something “too” is still orthogonal!)
It does also beg the question of when and if Android-“only” hardware can be abandoned in the foreseeable future. Or is this egg-basket just too small… If there is just one manufacturer having gone this way (especially one with spotty availability), the answer is pretty much yes. Let’s hope that won’t be the case.
I think it’s a bit odd that we haven’t asked @mal his opinion. I know it’s a bit of ‘putting you on the spot’ but, what do you think of an SFOS and FP arrangement? I would think that FP would be able to support something like the open devices initiative from Sony, or?
I have no experience with the Fairphones, but after I repaired two Xperias (X had a swelled battery which popped off the back, 10 III had a physically broken volume rocker which was falling out), repairability just became a lot more important for me.
You can fix those Sony devices, but you need experience, a heat gun, and then you may still destroy something which was working before the repair, if you are unlucky or inexperienced. I can’t tell if the Sony devices are harder to repair than others, my local repair store didn’t want to repair them, “because he doesn’t have spares and if I provide them, it would still be more complicated than for other devices”.
Repairing Sony devices is as easy or difficult as other devices. Personally i found it rather easy to open Sony devices and work inside them. A completely different thing is the availability of spare parts, original or aftermarket. This may be the reason why repair shops don’t want to fix them and name it ‘complicated’.
Should Jolla focus and give maintance to Fairphones too?
If they have the resources and will, yes.
The more the merrier.
Yes, of course. One of the main reasons of the Jolla tragedy it the lack of compatible phones.
That’s a good point, the Fairphone also seems to stay longer on the market.
As my repair seems to have caused some other damage (loud noise on the other end when making phone calls), I wanted a new Xperia 10 III as a backup or replacement, and had to buy a device on ebay from china, which is said to be “factory new” but may be refurbished. Good from an ecological point of view, but not the best option if I would need it right now due to some damage.
Who knows how long I will be able to source phones this way.
And let’s not start talking about claiming warranty repairs in this case 
Jolla could and for my part also should focus on Fairphone. That’s my opinion. These Sony X devices seem to be always at the end-of-line when Jolla is announcing support for a given model. Furthermore Sony’s support for their Open Device Program has never looked that convincing for a plain user of Sailfish like me (of course I might not know if there actually is some real support behind the stages).
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve come to understand that Google takes (the official version of) Android away from the manufacturer quite easily if they start to hassle with another OS. If that is true, then Fairphone will be very reluctant to start dancing with SFOS, as if they loose Android, there’s a high propability that’s the end of Fairphone.
Well, that wasn’t the real question of this thread, sorry, but I just mean it would be a one way street in support department; Jolla supporting Fairphone and not the other way round.
…if I’ve gotten this puzzle right that is…
Still - even though Fairphone’s hands would be tied and they couldn’t give direct support for Jolla (I’m not seeing that Sony is doing that either??) - I think the answer for the original question is “yes”.
I think much better and simpler Idea would be to offer Android App Support for Ported Devices on a licence fee base. Maintaining different configuration for Android App Support is much easier (IMHO) than offer full official SailfishOS releases. We discussed this with @spienima during the Berlin C2 Flash Event. If this will happen - every SailfishOS Port could became “kind official” SailfishOS!
I am happy that my comment got so much hearts… Now this Problem get very important for me personally. My Xperia 10 III is getting old, my Jolla C2 has very low-spec hardware, bad display, poor battery life. Its unfortunately not usable as a daily driver when you coming from Xperia 10 III. Sony Xperia IV and V are still not ready and usable. What alternatives we have? Exact. Fairphone 5. Very good hardware, good port quality…
Fairphone 2 was my daily driver for 2 years - thanks to @mal great port. It was better than Jolla C even as alpha1. Lets hope @Jolla will hear it. Jolla have a great product to sell. Jolla have customers who are ready to pay for that. Why don’t offer just this product? I would buy 1,2,3 licences when Jolla would bring a phone on good hardware. but its always low spec or middle spec Hardware what we get with official SailfishOS. Where there exists ports in the wild with much better hardware and much better quality (sorry Jolla, but this is often true) than the official ones. So the conclusion is that we are forced to take and use poor hardware to be able to use Android App Support. That is a bad situation. Bad for us. Bad for Jolla. If you could not offer good hardware with SailfishOS - than let the port writers make SailfishOS on good Hardware an focus on Android App support.
#android app support licence
Then you might consider changing the topic title to “Jolla should sell licences for Android App Support (AAS) for Ported Devices”, if that is what it is really about.
IMO the current title “Should Jolla focus and give maint[en]ance to Fairphones too?” does not make much sense, because supporting yet another device is the opposite of “focusing”.
That is not my Topic, @olf So i think i don’t have the right to change its name. On the other hand, it has to do with the Fairphone, so i think the topic name is correct. And yes, i would be happy if Jolla licence the AAS in first place for Android 4/5
Oops, right, I missed that. Well, so you may open one with that title and a bit more concise write-up of your suggestion, with focus on the advantages this brings for Jolla (Jollyboys and Seafarix).