[The_Passporter]

"The Jolla C is a new Sailfish OS-powered smartphone from the Finnish firm. It comes with a pure build of Sailfish OS 2.0, which means that there are no third-party apps installed. The OS is compatible with Android apps, so if you can�t find what you�re looking for in Jolla�s app catalog, you can get some from Google�s."

Why is it that a new OS can emerge using Google's apps and here we find ourselves having joined the Darkside and letting the Emperor (JC) freeze our beloved BB10 in a cryogenic sleep like Han Solo?



Apparently Google is looking at Web Apps for their Chrome Books so if that's the case then all would need is an updated browser and we should be able to accomplish anything we would need or for the most part. This would accommodate everyone including MS, Jolla , BlackBerry and many more.

If BB10 is killed and another OS emerges to become successful doing the exact same thing I would be just beside myself with anger.
I am truly praying that the EU has an effect on the Google Play Services restrictions Google puts on some of their apps.

Posted via CB10

[Ment]

Jolla isn't doing anything, its almost bankrupt. Its a pimple in the underarm of the smartphone world in terms of impact.

What Android apps does Jolla support and how do I get them?

Note regarding the Google Play Store

Sailfish OS does not support Google Play store, because it relies on Google's proprietary background services only found on Android devices running Google's Android. We always advise against installing Google Services on SailfishOS, as it is known to potentially cause a multitude of problems ranging from serious to trivial.

Applications that report that they require Google Play Services may work entirely or partially regardless of the error. Most often applications use the services to sync data from your device to Google's servers.

Chromebooks use ChromeOS not BB browser.

EU takes years to accomplish anything. They've been tussling with Google over search for half a decade.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

What has Jolla done? Got any sales numbers? Revenue and profit info? Sorry but Sailfish is a hobbyist solution at best...

Browser based apps might be coming... it's unknown just hope popular they will be against on device apps.


The problem is the RIMPIRE was always the Darkside...

[The_Passporter]

Well so far they have went from nothing to something but still not much. It's at least gaining instead of being stagnant and rotting like a a skinned apple on the deck in the sun. The apple would be BB10 lol.

Posted via CB10

[The_Passporter]

Wasn't OnePlus a big question mark when it came out?

I know I'm not that technical but in a nutshell, can't there be a WebApp created like say a Paypal WebApp that can work on all browsers?

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/hh771462.aspx

Posted via CB10

[Ment]

Wasn't OnePlus a big question mark when it came out?

I know I'm not that technical but in a nutshell, can't there be a WebApp created like say a Paypal WebApp that can work on all browsers?

Posted via CB10

OnePlus is full Android, passes all of Googles compatibility tests, and came with the Playstore in countries that supported it so not the same. No phone where you have to hack on an Android runtime. BB10, Jolla, Tizen will ever get a GPS license.

Google provides a framework, Chrome browser , backend server and services that allow their solution to work. Plus their vast reach gives developers incentive to create Instant Apps for it. Smaller niche companies have nothing like that.

[Troy Tiscareno]

As Dunt said, what, exactly, has Jolla done? They've burned through a bunch of investor's money to create a Linux-based OS that has been used on a few thousand devices. These devices don't ship with the ability to run Android apps - though you can install an Android runtime after-the-fact and use some Android apps. But Jolla also has questionable security and is open-source so that anyone can install anything on it - good, bad, or dangerous.

BB and BB10 are nothing like Jolla or Sailfish. Jolla is a tiny startup company, BB is a big multinational company. BB10 is targeted towards government and enterprises that require high-end security, which means that BB has to develop for and seek security certifications. Sailfish is developed for hobbyists and doesn't need to meet any requirements except being interesting.

But until Sailfish captures at least 2% of the market, it's completely irrelevant (much like BB10 and WinPhone have become).

[paulwallace1234]

As Dunt said, what, exactly, has Jolla done? They've burned through a bunch of investor's money to create a Linux-based OS that has been used on a few thousand devices. These devices don't ship with the ability to run Android apps - though you can install an Android runtime after-the-fact and use some Android apps. But Jolla also has questionable security and is open-source so that anyone can install anything on it - good, bad, or dangerous.

BB and BB10 are nothing like Jolla or Sailfish. Jolla is a tiny startup company, BB is a big multinational company. BB10 is targeted towards government and enterprises that require high-end security, which means that BB has to develop for and seek security certifications. Sailfish is developed for hobbyists and doesn't need to meet any requirements except being interesting.

But until Sailfish captures at least 2% of the market, it's completely irrelevant (much like BB10 and WinPhone have become).

I've never seen anyone question the security of Sailfish...

The install anything on it is rubbish, the memo core is open source not the Sailfish UI, it's not like anyone can push bad code and send it out.

[Troy Tiscareno]

I've never seen anyone question the security of Sailfish...

That's the point - no one has questioned it, because it isn't important enough to question. No one is using it for anything important (commercial/enterprise/government), so there's been no need to do a thorough review. But security is NOT CHEAP - it's expensive, and security is BB's main differentiator, so they've got to keep security levels high - at a significant expense that Jolla doesn't have to bear.

Jolla also doesn't have to pay for custom drivers - they can use the same Linux-based drivers that Android uses, while BB has to pay for custom QNX drivers for any hardware they want to run BB10 on - and with the current (very low) sales volumes, the cost for just the drivers alone would probably run $50-75 per phone. That is a massive expense that, by itself, makes BB10 uncompetitive on the market price-wise. You then still have to add in the cost of development of BB10 itself, which also has to be spread across the devices sold, and that cost is higher still.

BB10 was losing BB money when they were selling 4M phones per quarter. Now that they're selling 500k phones per quarter (and probably only half of those being BB10), imagine the losses with all of those development costs spread across so many fewer devices.

The point is: BB10's situation is nothing like Sailfish's situation, so the two shouldn't be compared.

[kvndoom]

Jolla hasn't "done" anything yet. Let's re-evaluate them in a year or two.

Passport SE, "The BlockBerry" - Cricket Wireless

[The_Passporter]

Well it went from a thought to a phone and what will be next? My point is that it is progressing and that is something that BB10 is not. I hear talk of WebApps being possibly the future of apps or at least a solution to the app gap and if so that would give life to many new and old ideas for OS's. Not only that but BB10 and MS would also have a better chance at acquiring market share and attracting more Dev's.
I'm just looking to the future and hoping there is a change in the current structure of things in mobile. I can't say I am happy or impressed with the direction it's gone with now only two guys at the top who have no real incentive to do as much for the consumer as they are for themselves. Guess we will have to wait and see.

Posted via CB10

[jevinzac]

. These devices don't ship with the ability to run Android apps - though you can install an Android runtime after-the-fact and use some Android apps. But Jolla also has questionable security and is open-source so that anyone can install anything on it - good, bad, or dangerous.

I don't understand this!? These devices don't ship with the ability to run Android apps? Lol it has an app store, download the android runtime from the app store. It's just BlackBerry 10 has it pre installed! I don't know what difference does it make, I think what Jolla has done is better since if we want it, we can install it.
Also, it runs "some" android apps? Again! It runs far more android apps than BlackBerry 10, and it runs it smoothly! We can install snapchat, banking apps, Clash of Clans etc which are some of the most famous apps and which doesn't work on BlackBerry 10! And it runs it way better than a BlackBerry 10 smartphone, even a Passport!
I have a Jolla and a Q10, my gf has Passport, so I have compared them :'D.

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

I don't understand this!? These devices don't ship with the ability to run Android apps? Lol it has an app store, download the android runtime from the app store. It's just BlackBerry 10 has it pre installed! I don't know what difference does it make, I think what Jolla has done is better since if we want it, we can install it.

The difference is that there's a HUGE legal difference between shipping a device with an Android Runtime already installed on it and shipping a device that doesn't - even if the end-user can install one later.

There's also a difference between Jolla and BB in that BB has now licensed GMS (Google Mobile Services) and the Play Store. When BB chose to take that license, they were knowingly giving up the legal ability to make any new devices with non-Google-certified Android code. Jolla has not licensed anything from Google, so they're under no such restriction. Of course, Google could opt to block Jolla from the Play Store at anytime, and they'd be fully within their rights to do so.

Also, it runs "some" android apps? Again! It runs far more android apps than BlackBerry 10, and it runs it smoothly! We can install snapchat, banking apps, Clash of Clans etc which are some of the most famous apps and which doesn't work on BlackBerry 10! And it runs it way better than a BlackBerry 10 smartphone, even a Passport!

That's great, but that doesn't change the fact that mainstream users expect ALL apps to run - and without having to patch or sideload or use alternative app stores. As long as Sailfish can't do that, it will remain a hobby OS, not a mainstream one. And it's very questionable how long Jolla can survive without a mainstream product to bring in enough revenues.

Thus, the premise of this thread, that "Jolla is successful" is far from correct. They're a tiny company that's been burning investor money (i.e., running at a loss) and have put product in the hands of only thousands of people. That isn't sustainable for much longer. They're going to have to make sales to millions of people on an ongoing basis, or their investors will pull out and they'll go bankrupt.

[jevinzac]

The difference is that there's a HUGE legal difference between shipping a device with an Android Runtime already installed on it and shipping a device that doesn't - even if the end-user can install one later.

There's also a difference between Jolla and BB in that BB has now licensed GMS (Google Mobile Services) and the Play Store. When BB chose to take that license, they were knowingly giving up the legal ability to make any new devices with non-Google-certified Android code. Jolla has not licensed anything from Google, so they're under no such restriction. Of course, Google could opt to block Jolla from the Play Store at anytime, and they'd be fully within their rights to do so.

Huge legal difference? Care to explain? Jolla just comes with few basic apps out of the box, like Call, text and gallary...around 5-10 apps, rest all, we have to download from their Jolla Store, I don't know what difference does it make in terms of any legal issue. Even BlackBerry has android runtime on their BlackBerry World!
Do you have any source or proof that BlackBerry gave up the ability to support android runtime on their future release of BB10? Please don't come up with Google NDA stufff, just mention if BlackBerry had mentioned anything about it, other than the few people from CrackBerry.

That's great, but that doesn't change the fact that mainstream users expect ALL apps to run - and without having to patch or sideload or use alternative app stores. As long as Sailfish can't do that, it will remain a hobby OS, not a mainstream one. And it's very questionable how long Jolla can survive without a mainstream product to bring in enough revenues.

Thus, the premise of this thread, that "Jolla is successful" is far from correct. They're a tiny company that's been burning investor money (i.e., running at a loss) and have put product in the hands of only thousands of people. That isn't sustainable for much longer. They're going to have to make sales to millions of people on an ongoing basis, or their investors will pull out and they'll go bankrupt.

Mainstream users are going to see that if all of the one million apps are working on Jolla? :'D Who told you that it doesn't work? I said "far more" because I haven't installed all one million apps on it, whatever I installed, WORKED! But unfortunately on BlackBerry, it's a hit or miss. And you need to patch each and every app for BlackBerry 10, if it doesn't work, still it's just luck!
Also, you don't need to patch any separate apps for Jolla, just download from PlayStore directly and it works exceptionally :'). Not like BlackBerry 10, with stutters, lags and force closes and stuff!

Posted via CB10

[Plazmic Flame]

I get the angle you were coming from OP but really, BlackBerry and Jolla are very different.

You posted that image and the tagline says "limited to 1,000 units". If BlackBerry ever only sold 1,000 units; they would be bankrupt faster than you can say "it runs the Googles". Also, I'm not familiar but I would assume that this device doesn't have access to the Google Play store... which BlackBerry definitely couldn't afford to do.

[EFats]

...while BB has to pay for custom QNX drivers for any hardware they want to run BB10 on - and with the current (very low) sales volumes, the cost for just the drivers alone would probably run $50-75 per phone. ...

Ummm what? You do realise BlackBerry own QNX, right? While Qualcomm or other chipset vendors may provide Android drivers, it wouldn't be surprising of QNX would already be on the hook for some drivers for their customers in other businesses already.
There is no way that is the driver cost per phone. While it isn't for every one, it isn't exactly difficult for the engineers specialising in this sort of thing. BlackBerry has a very limited BOM and phone models so it's not like there is a huge amount of drivers to write

I know exactly what it takes to port an embedded OS to a new architecture having basically done just that before. I estimate it didn't even cost $100k, so that's peanuts per phone even at BlackBerry volumes. And I'm not even the best at this sort of thing

[xtremeled]

"The Jolla C is a new Sailfish OS-powered smartphone from the Finnish firm. It comes with a pure build of Sailfish OS 2.0, which means that there are no third-party apps installed. The OS is compatible with Android apps, so if you can’t find what you’re looking for in Jolla’s app catalog, you can get some from Google’s."

Why is it that a new OS can emerge using Google's apps and here we find ourselves having joined the Darkside and letting the Emperor (JC) freeze our beloved BB10 in a cryogenic sleep like Han Solo?



Apparently Google is looking at Web Apps for their Chrome Books so if that's the case then all would need is an updated browser and we should be able to accomplish anything we would need or for the most part. This would accommodate everyone including MS, Jolla , BlackBerry and many more.

If BB10 is killed and another OS emerges to become successful doing the exact same thing I would be just beside myself with anger.
I am truly praying that the EU has an effect on the Google Play Services restrictions Google puts on some of their apps.

Posted via CB10

Congratulations! You've found a device maker with a smaller portion of the smartphone market than Blackberry.

[Troy Tiscareno]

Ummm what? You do realise BlackBerry own QNX, right?

Umm... yeah. This isn't my first day here.

While Qualcomm or other chipset vendors may provide Android drivers, it wouldn't be surprising of QNX would already be on the hook for some drivers for their customers in other businesses already.

Actually, no. QNX isn't normally used on any of the hardware that's found in a smartphone outside of BB10. Smartphone components are very specific.

There is no way that is the driver cost per phone. While it isn't for every one, it isn't exactly difficult for the engineers specialising in this sort of thing. BlackBerry has a very limited BOM and phone models so it's not like there is a huge amount of drivers to write

BB doesn't get to write them - they have to pay the component manufacturers for those drivers, and those manufacturers look at custom drivers as a profit center, so they charge high prices for those drivers and BB really has no choice but to pay. John Chen himself has explained all this.

It's estimated that it costs between $5-10M for all of the drivers needed to make a phone - and then that cost has to be spread across the phones manufactured. If that number is only 250k, then that's $20-$40 per phone. As the number of phones drop, the cost per phone gets bigger and bigger.

[ninjakaiden]

Umm... yeah. This isn't my first day here.



Actually, no. QNX isn't normally used on any of the hardware that's found in a smartphone outside of BB10. Smartphone components are very specific.



BB doesn't get to write them - they have to pay the component manufacturers for those drivers, and those manufacturers look at custom drivers as a profit center, so they charge high prices for those drivers and BB really has no choice but to pay. John Chen himself has explained all this.

It's estimated that it costs between $5-10M for all of the drivers needed to make a phone - and then that cost has to be spread across the phones manufactured. If that number is only 250k, then that's $20-$40 per phone. As the number of phones drop, the cost per phone gets bigger and bigger.

I have no idea how this driver situation works, but would Jolla then have to pay more for component manufacturers to write drivers for them also?

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

I have no idea how this driver situation works, but would Jolla then have to pay more for component manufacturers to write drivers for them also?

Sailfish is Linux-based, like Android, so the same drivers work for both. So, Jolla doesn't really have driver costs, beyond possibly tweaking them a bit sometimes. BB has to pay for QNX-based drivers to be written (by the component manufacturers), and the manufacturers charge a lot for that because they can - alternative drivers are a profit center for them.

[EFats]

Sailfish is Linux-based, like Android, so the same drivers work for both. So, Jolla doesn't really have driver costs, beyond possibly tweaking them a bit sometimes. BB has to pay for QNX-based drivers to be written (by the component manufacturers), and the manufacturers charge a lot for that because they can - alternative drivers are a profit center for them.

Unless you got a good source for this, I am highly skeptical of this claim. First, probably most of the drivers for Linux/Android are open source. People are free to peep at the code. Any engineer worth his/her salt could then re-create the drivers for QNX.
Secondly, most silicon manufacturers make money off the silicon. They may not write the drivers for you, but they're not gonna stop you from trying to roll your own especially if you plan to ship over 100k units. They'll be happy to release the device datasheets to you so you can do your own drivers. Cause if you don't, then the next guy will and he will secure that design win.
In fact if you use a popular OS, more than likely they will just give you reference drivers in order to move silicon.

Have you ever worked in the IC industry???

[EFats]

Actually, no. QNX isn't normally used on any of the hardware that's found in a smartphone outside of BB10. Smartphone components are very specific.

BB doesn't get to write them - they have to pay the component manufacturers for those drivers, and those manufacturers look at custom drivers as a profit center, so they charge high prices for those drivers and BB really has no choice but to pay. John Chen himself has explained all this.
...

Really? You have a link to that? That's funny cause I swear I looked up all the peripheral components in a Galaxy last year and I could purchase pretty much all of them off any of the big electronics distributors. What you need drivers for is all that crap, the accelerometer, camera, temperature, etc.
I use some of those parts individually for the products we develop as do many other people. Sometimes the high volume guys, i.e. cell phone, will get a special part or ordering number, but it will be the same silicon

Normally the OS vendor, not the silicon supplier, will have several board support packages that support very specific configuration of hardware, if you have something special, then you pay the OS vendor or you do it yourself.

You know, I have designed and built a custom embedded device not running Android, but another OS. It used a TI OMAP processor (yes, very similar to the one the Z10) and other similar peripherals. I got that dang thing booting and running and I can say for sure we NEVER paid a cent to the silicon vendor for drivers. If they didn't exist, I had to roll my own.

[keliew]

That's low-level programming...nothing you can hide, but all about how you write the drives to unlock it's power.

Also why some don't release their design to keep it in-house, e.g. NVIDIA long time ago.

I think it depends who you buy the hardware from, etc. But mobile phones are nothing special...

BlackBerry Passport via CB10

[Bluenoser63]

Ummm what? You do realise BlackBerry own QNX, right? While Qualcomm or other chipset vendors may provide Android drivers, it wouldn't be surprising of QNX would already be on the hook for some drivers for their customers in other businesses already.
There is no way that is the driver cost per phone. While it isn't for every one, it isn't exactly difficult for the engineers specialising in this sort of thing. BlackBerry has a very limited BOM and phone models so it's not like there is a huge amount of drivers to write

I know exactly what it takes to port an embedded OS to a new architecture having basically done just that before. I estimate it didn't even cost $100k, so that's peanuts per phone even at BlackBerry volumes. And I'm not even the best at this sort of thing

Yes. I call BS everytime that someone states that it costs millions and millions of dollars to write drivers for a chipset. That is so much FUD that it is laughable.

[Bluenoser63]

Umm... yeah. This isn't my first day here.

Actually, no. QNX isn't normally used on any of the hardware that's found in a smartphone outside of BB10. Smartphone components are very specific.

BB doesn't get to write them - they have to pay the component manufacturers for those drivers, and those manufacturers look at custom drivers as a profit center, so they charge high prices for those drivers and BB really has no choice but to pay. John Chen himself has explained all this.

It's estimated that it costs between $5-10M for all of the drivers needed to make a phone - and then that cost has to be spread across the phones manufactured. If that number is only 250k, then that's $20-$40 per phone. As the number of phones drop, the cost per phone gets bigger and bigger.

Estimated by who? If you were around when Linux first started, guys wrote their own drivers for all the stuff they needed. It isn't as complicated as you would like to believe. Also, Chen isn't a trusted source. He will make any excuse (even lie) to defend his position.