No thanks, I’d rather use a Google Pixel with GrapheneOS
Image transcription:
buy privacy-first community driven phone look inside closed source OS with no recovery image and outdated dependencies
No thanks, I’d rather use a Google Pixel with GrapheneOS
Image transcription:
buy privacy-first community driven phone look inside closed source OS with no recovery image and outdated dependencies
I really like the idea of the Jolla and am seriously considering getting one. I’m also the exact target audience (Linux nerd, privacy conscious, FOSS advocate, want to own MY device fully, hate having to use a US-based duopoly in my current daily life).
That’s exactly why I don’t understand their decision to keep parts of their system closed. The overlap between people who want a Linux phone and who are OK with that Linux phone not being fully open seems to be tiny.
I can’t talk for Jolla. What I do know is that they have opened up meaningful parts in recent times. Even the one major remaining closed part, the UI, had important parts open sourced recently, with open sourcing of Lipstick.
I don’t think they will open source everything in the near future but possibly the qt environment might be on the list to come. If that were to happen the only essential part remaining would really be the home screen I think. So it is really that, are you purist and consider that a knock-out criterion or do you also have no problem with using closed source components with desktop Linux distributions?
I’m not really that purist - I’ll use closed-sourced software when necessary. For example, I have Davinci Resolve and Bitwig Studio installed. Sure I would prefer if those were open, but the target audience here are creatives, who largely won’t care.
On the other hand, Jolla is trying to sell exactly to those people that DO care, which makes the choice so hard to understand and support.