What’s so bad about AOSP? Sailfish OS itself uses AOSP code, if I’m not mistaken. PS.: I’m running my phone without Google Services.
Stefan, the Problem is, we want a real Linux OS on the Phone. Android AOSP is a bit better than Android with GMS, but it is still Android. It uses Linux Kernel, but it is still not a real Linux OS.
If you ever had a Nokia N900, Nokia N9, maybe Nokia N950, Jolla Phone… You will understand it.
We want a full Linux. Not just Android with an Linux Kernel
No, I only had a Nokia C5 that I used for about half a year because the rest of the year it was in “reparation” (three times!), and they could not fix the trashy phone… That was my reason for buying the FP1…
I have played around with Sailfish OS on the FP2 and it wasn’t very useful in my opinion…
Which Linux functionality are you missing in Android?
Well, you are not using Linux on your PC, or am i wrong?
Linux give an advanced user not only the ability to use (consume) the apps, which other people have created.
Linux give the ability to create something by yourself. And I am not a software Developer!
With Linux you can repair (and also brake) anything you want. Sky is the only limit.
Of course, this is not for everyone, but People, who crying loud for official SailfishOS Support, you can’t fascinate them with Fairphone Open. A normal 08/15 user - maybe. But not us, mature Linux freaks…
This is ok, that you did’n find SailfishOS very usefull, its depends on what you want to do with you phone.
I bought FP2 not because its Fair and ethical, but because its easy repairable and open.
This aspects are important for me - for you can be other aspects important. Its ok. All people are different.
All i want to say - if we would be fascinated with Fairphone Open - we would never cry for official Sailfish Support. We want to have a real Linux Computer in the pocket. Taht is our dream, and we live this dream…
Who knows, maybe we will get with FP2, Maybe not. Maybe with FP5 or any other company…
No, I’m on Windows 10, but I have used Linux. And I would happily change to Linux if there was AutoCAD and Adobe Illustrator on it… I often curse Windows for not being intuitive.
Still, I don’t see what I can’t do in Android. There is a terminal emulator and Busybox. With root you can modify any file. There are a lot of modifications, such as Gravity Box and Xprivacy. Can you give me an example, other than Sailfish’s great user interface, for something that Android can’t do?
I’m not a power user and the reason why I’m interested in the Sailfish project is that I would like to see on the market an OS that is really independent. I’m happy that Fairphone offers an open OS, but they depend too much on Google, as they must follow Google security updates and follow Google’s agenda.
I have two questions:
- what do you think about Ubuntu Touch? Would it also be a good alternative for you?
- What do you think about all the news about Russia’s interest for Sailfish? Do you think it will help Sailfish to develop faster or do you think that there is a risk that sailfish will be less independent?
Ubuntu Touch is a good OS, but i see more future behind SailfishOS. Its simplier, more intuitive, less complex.
Even if your phone show you a black screen - you can access it from ssh and fix the broken component which prevent UI from starting. That is not possible with android. you can compile on the device. you can work on a very low level. You can use all the tools, you have in linux: mutt, gcc, make etc. You can use all the network tools, traceroute, nmap etc.
In Android is all that not possible. Even with root, even with Terminal
Android is an Mobile OS on top of Linux Kernel, you can go on a level deeper with root and terminal, but you can’t go as deep like in SailfishOS
Have you actually compiled anything on Sailfish OS?
Well, you’re not the only one, Russia wants to buy 15000 phones with Sailfish :
Why we want to have sailfish? I think because we are a little bit crazy like everybody who buys a fairphone
Main reason for me to favour Gnu/Linux instead of Android is the higher degree of openness. See FP1 and the trouble you are having to get updates. This is not likely to happen under Gnu/Linux. See the situation on desktop computers: you can run the latest OS-versions on very old computers. And this just makes sense, if it comes to durability. And I want the same in the phone world.
@sverris That’s because of the closed source blobs. The FP2 faces the same problem to a lower degree. I’d have loved Sailfish OS on the FP1, but that’s not possible because Mediatek made this phone’s software as hard to modify as possible.
Sailfish OS and AOSP both suffer from closed source drivers.
Yes, and this is the main problem of Android that vendors give sh** about maintaining their software for a longer period of time, and Google does not care about it either. Less openness > no outsider can maintain > bad for durability.
It’s about the hardware. Almost all smartphones, including Fairphone 2 (and to a worse extend Fairphone 1) have some proprietary hardware components, thus binary blobs are needed to make the hardware work. Whether you want to have Android or Sailfish or whatever on it, does not make a difference.
I believe that the whole Sailfish story is a hype. I do not understand why people want it. Some people speak of fairness. If you talk about software, I’d think you talk about free software. Sailfish is not free software. As with Fairphone OS and Fairphone Open, there are some binary blobs. In case of Sailfish you have a proprietary user interface on top of it. In case of Fairphone OS you have Google Services (normally) enabled. None of them are free software, but relatively speaking, Fairphone Open is the “most free”, as in: there are only a few binary blobs, and as long as the hardware is not open, there is no option to avoid those.
It is argued that you have more control over your system with Sailfish. Since it is not free software, I’d argue that this is not true. Still, maybe it is more Unix-like — is it like GNU or BSD? —, but I need to see first that this is the case before I believe it. In any case, on my Fairphone Open (without Google Services) I have the app Termux. From this I ssh to my server if I want a Unix-like system.
I have the feeling that Sailfish is very overrated. Am I wrong? Do people have experience with this OS, specifically the experience that you have more control over your device, or are there features in Sailfish that you need that are simply not available on Android and derivatives?
No buttons - the gestures are great! And only a few people use Sailfish, so you feel better when you are one of them!
And why there should be only one or two OS? For example the car world would be really boring with only two car brands !
So - Sailfish OS is great!
You are wrong. (well from my side). I use Sailfish since 2013, before i had Nokia N9 with Meego and Nokia N900 with Maemo.
All this systems are pure Linux OS. Android is not pure Linux. Yes Sailfish is only to 70% open source. but this is no problem for me, as long as i can have a nativ Linux OS in my pocket. That is why so many want SailfishOS. Because its Linux. It has absolutely no restrictions. Do what you want. Sky is the limit.
I was a bit disappointed about the buttons-vs-gestures thing. I thought that Sailfish OS avoids buttons altogether, but there were actually a lot of UI elements ts where you have to press, instead of swipe. (Specifically, for example, the settings menu, where you have the “back arrow”-equivalent to Android.)
Yes, maybe, but why there shoud be only two OSs?
I’d recommend taking the OS for a spin before you rant to heavily about it.
The so called “back button” in the settings isn’t the only way to go back, and you would know that a swipe gesture (as in iOS) brings you back a level if you ever tried SFOS.
A tutorial at the first boot explains those gestures in great detail. There are other optional gestures, like swiping from to top to close an app, which can make usage even more comfortable.
SFOS has many unique UI concepts you have to touch to see how they can benefit your everyday tasks.
And one of the greatest features of Linux (as Linus said himself once) is that you can use whatever you want, be it open or closed. You are free to have the choice of using closed software.
KDE got a lot of criticism because QT is not completely open. The company behind QT open sourced more and more components over the years (if you install a current SDK there are only 2 closed source modules left).
But distributions shipping KDE were still Linux distributions.
That is how Linux works. You can do whatever you want. And Android as well as SFOS are two very different distributions.
If you really care about open source you would not use a phone with closed source firmware. But on the level modern smartphones (and PCs) operate, you can hardly have an open system. So what is bad about an OS option like SFOS, which has some closed source components, but work great for many users.