Live data from Hacker News

The Jolla phone – first impressions

seravo.fi

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#61

This is the first post that really sparked my imagination about The Other Half. Lots of possibilities to build dedicated devices to different environments and tasks. Jolla really should make their marketing material more concrete to target their true early adopter audience.

I have an idea for The Other Half: an Xbee 802.15.4 module that could facilitate a distributed telecommunications network between mobile handsets. I have my eye on David Rowe's open source codec2 to support voice calls because it can achieve telephone quality at 1400 bits-per-second, and I think that at this bandwidth multiple calls can be relayed efficiently, (and _securely_), though a mesh network. If a handset has WiFi access then calls can then route through the internet and path around the world. If we want to continue to use the antiquated practice of telephone numbers as identifiers, then we can use cryptographic primatives and a blockchain, (like bitcoin), to prove telephone number-handset authenticity on the new peer-to-peer network.

Combine this with a Jolla phone for a connection to a conventional cellular network and perhaps a handset could move seamlessly through peer-to-peer calling, handset-to-VoIP calling, and the PTSN.

Then the day may come where we can finally do away with these telecommunications companies, and have a decentralized and secure-by-design phone system once and for all.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#62
post #17

What puzzles me about Jolla and it's Sailfish OS is the constant emphasis on being "truly open" when in fact the sources of the OS are nowhere to be found. They point you to projects such as Mer and say Sailfish OS is based on it but by the same logic Apple is "truly open" because OS X is based on Darwin.

It's not fully open. See http://piratepad.net/JollaSoftwareState

However Jolla said that long term plans about opening things up aren't finalized.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#63
Here is a more honest article (in Finnish) from someone who have used the device for a day: http://mobiili.fi/2013/11/28/jolla-vuorokauden-kaytossa-tass...

English translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=n&prev=...

According to the article the biggest problem seems to be Internet-connectivity, the reception is sometimes bad and it has problems connecting to WLAN. The browser is also quite slow and needs improvements.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#64
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to be fair its only 399, so they dont seem to target top of the line.

And the Google Nexus 5 is $350, unlocked with no restrictions.

Nokia Lumia 520 which has similar resolution (480 x 800) is 79$ and in fact you can get one for 49$ today. Off contract. I know that HN is not fond of WP but just comparing hardware here.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#65
post #52
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think long-term. What could you conceivably do on the desktop that you can't do on the browser? Media recording and management? HTML5 is well on the way and someone compiled a functional version of FFMpeg in Javascript just recently. Storage? Security? Dropbox and more of the kind. We already have document management. The only thing I can think of right now is a render farm but we'll do that in the cloud anyway (even…

> What could you conceivably do on the desktop that you can't do on the browser? Off the top of my head, 1) Anything low level hardware (reading data via USB, or pushing data into HDMI, for instance) 2) Interacting with ANY hardware that's not explicitly supported by Javascript. Try creating an HTML5/JS scanner app. 3) Writing super-fast CPU-specific code, think Assembly language. That's the reason there are no HTML5…

IMHO that's list what you can't do "with the browser" not "on the browser". If browser is somehow exposed to interfaces of peripherals/devices/etc there is no reason why you can't do that "on browser". Yes, you can't do that with browser alone, but you can do that on browser.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#66
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jolla means "light boat" in Finnish. I guess it's a tongue in cheek for the Elop's burning platform speech, where Jolla is the light boat getting a away from it. (Agree that for global products, people should prefer names that are easier to pronounce)

It also occurred to me that with Nokia's history as a rubber manufacturer they're bound to have made rubber rafts at some point (which would indeed be called `jolla'). Or I could be completely overreading this...

They made, and are still making excellent rubber boots.

http://www.prisma.fi/tuotekuvat//large/71/1bz60y0a4pi3kq31.j...

But jolla is a small boat.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#67
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No-one said the whole point of the phone is HTML5 apps. The reviewer thinks HTML5 apps are the future, that's all. Native Sailfish apps are Qt based; with android apps as a secondary thing, presumably to kick-start the platform while they try to build an ecosystem. (Which makes sense, developers won't come unless people are using it but people won't use it if there are no apps.)

Yeah, that's probably a fair point. It wasn't clear until I looked at the architecture diagram, though. Native Sailfish apps are Qt based; with android apps as a secondary thing, presumably to kick-start the platform while they try to build an ecosystem. (Which makes sense, developers won't come unless people are using it but people won't use it if there are no apps.) I'm guessing that was Blackberry's strategy too.…

I have different question.

Technically no vendor can offer something exceptionally different from hardware point of view. Bazillion megapixels, bazillion megaherz, bazillion cores and etc. - nobody cares about that. It takes decent pictures - good enough. It is not camera with lens replacement anyway. It works reasonably fast - good enough, I take it. Replaceable parts(1) - meh I don't care unless I can attach lens but then it is mirrorless camera not smartphone. It doesn't have my favorite app (twitter, vine, endomondo, hangouts, skype... name whatever else is important for you) - I don't need it.

Basically software ate hardware. Now let's talk about software. Development tools for Android are good enough but far from perfect. iOS tools are better, Qt tools are better (at least for me), Windows tools are better, HTML tools are better. The only important advantage Android has its openness. iOS lose because of that (2), Blackberry lose because of that and Windows will lose because of that (IMHO). Jolla are much more open here but are they open enough? Does it matter anymore? Firefox OS is in much better position as a lot of people have explored using HTML for apps and writing app for Firefox OS is basically packaging it and you have app. Most probably you don't need to write app at all if you already have responsive design website.

Android problem - it is dependent on Google very much and it is both good and bad. It is good for users as they get good experience, it is bad as they are getting closed into Google's world and I doubt that it is good thing.

My question is: what next smartphone OS should offer to be considered winning?

1) Replaceable parts are still good thing if it will create market where you can buy cheaper parts to replace broken ones or outdated ones.

2) iOS market share in the world is low but pretty good in USA. So I'm using "lose" very loosely.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#68
post #57
post #3

Minor nitpick: I don't know how to say "Jolla". I mean I know that "Jolla" is pronounced "Hoya" in European Spanish ("Hosha" in Argentinian), but in most European languages it'd be "Yolla" with a soft "j" and the naive English pronunciation would be "Djolla". I don't know which was the intended one. Not that it really matters I suppose, but why go to all that trouble building an apparently lovely device and giving it…

The right way, according to the Jolla employees is "Dzholla", not "Yolla". But some of them say Yolla at times :)

"Jolla" is a Finnish word, pronounced "yolla". I'd be very surprised to hear any Finn actually say "dzholla".

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#69
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right way, according to the Jolla employees is "Dzholla", not "Yolla". But some of them say Yolla at times :)

"Jolla" is a Finnish word, pronounced "yolla". I'd be very surprised to hear any Finn actually say "dzholla".

Yes, and they on purpose didn't intend it to sound like the Finnish pronunciation of Jolla. That's what I've heard. But Finnish speaking Jolla crew often fall back to the naturally sounding way, that's why you hear them saying Yolla.

Re: The Jolla phone – first impressions

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the Google Nexus 5 is $350, unlocked with no restrictions.

Nokia Lumia 520 which has similar resolution (480 x 800) is 79$ and in fact you can get one for 49$ today. Off contract. I know that HN is not fond of WP but just comparing hardware here.

Despite the resolution being lower, the Lumia also has a much slower CPU, GPU, 5MP vs 8MP camera etc...
Post reply on HN