Wanted to mention that Sailfish has a lot of closed-source components, especially UI-related, despite the overall marketing/"vibe" making it look very open. If anything, AOSP (Android) is more open than Sailfish. I don't think this has changed with Sailfish 5, see e.g.:
Huh. I really don't see the point of this, vs something like GrapheneOS.
Edit: I'm well aware of the differences between typical Linux and Android (especially the security architecture!), and I'm willing to make some sacrifices in the name of FOSS... but only if it's actually FOSS.
Given how sensitive information most people have on their phones (banking, chats, and whatnot), it's a disaster in the making.
The typical answer is "but I'll only use open source apps that I trust". Sandboxing doesn't only protect you against rogue apps, it primarily protects you against 0-days in apps that you do trust.
/etc configuration instead of the insanely bad system properties crap, glibc instead of bionic (which has even worse POSIX compliance than Windows), ld instead of linker, FHS, not having a batshit insane No-Sockets rule, not needing to port software that already compiles and runs on GNU/Linux, X11/Wayland/Arcan, system services aren't entangled with Java, normal IPC mechanisms instead whatever the fuck binder is. The list goes on.
Android (and by extension GrapheneOS) uses Linux as a kernel, but it lives in its own world and is completely unrecognizable. I'd say it's even more alien than macOS. For most users, the differences don't matter. If you're a programmer or a sysadmin with reasonable expectations, you feel like a fish out of water very fast. And I cannot honestly the changes are for the better.
> /etc configuration instead of the insanely bad system properties crap, glibc instead of bionic [...]
The practical downside, however, is that this phone does not natively run Android apps, while GrapheneOS runs all Android apps bar those that require Play Integrity. Desktop GNU/Linux programs are either unusable or a terrible experience on a mobile device with a small screen and no mouse.
> Desktop GNU/Linux programs are either unusable or a terrible experience on a mobile device with a small screen and no mouse.
Is this an assumption or coming from your experience? Because I'm typing this on a GNU/Linux phone in a desktop browser and use a bunch of desktop applications daily and haven't noticed.
Of course if you run GIMP or something like that it won't fit unless you plug an external screen and a mouse in, but all the applications I use daily are perfectly usable. There's a lot of Kirigami and libadwaita programs these days that just work well on a phone, and if I need to launch my bank's application there's always Waydroid.
That's true, but is contingent on you running those Android apps for it to be meaningful. I have a very small number of interactive things I do with my phone. For me what matters is that writing software isn't a pain in the ass, my usual expectations on storage (eg remote filesystems) works and works well, maintaining my system works, my non-interactive system scripts work, etc. Almost all of this is broken on Android, and it doesn't really make up for it by breaking it to make it better. I find much of the design choices of the operating system to be completely tasteless.
If you say, rely on google maps, banking apps, apps for your IoT appliances, etc. it's certainly relevant. I don't have any of that though.
For me the most and truest pressing issue is that cell modems are very, very tightly coupled with Android. It's still true for the Jolla Phone that it simply is a worse phone because the modem drivers are buggy. This is a complicated issue that isn't getting better, and is mostly to do with legislation legally mandating the tivoization of cell modems, a weird line in the sand on what responsibilities fall to the hardware or to what software, as well as the modem manufacturers themselves not really caring.
Also Play Integrity (if you run sandboxed Google Play Services), but it only passes at the basic level, which is enough for most apps that use Play Integrity.
The irony you fail to realize, the differences listed in fact would be typical of a random Unix system in the 80s, where it's just a mountain of bad and random opinions stapled on top of a Unix system. Some random and half-baked libc? You got it! Some bizarre and overly convoluted greenfield filesystem structure? It's right there! Completely different and frustrating custom linker behavior? Yep!
Everything I listed was an advantage. Now see, I don't think Unix is the be-all end-all of operating systems design. I don't particularly care for Linux, the BSDs, macOS, etc. But Android is a definite regression in the strongest terms. Give me a PIMOS or Genera or Squeak phone that works well. I'll be happier than I would with a Linux phone.
Ehm, a Pixel 9a is currently 349 Euro here (10a 399 Euro). Given that the OS is free, that's only a 19 Euro difference. For a much better camera, much better SoC, much better pretty much everything.
Of course, if your goal is to run SailfishOS, there is currently not much of another option.
I read somewhere that the owners have ties to russia, but the most important thing is that they’re marketing very aggressively through posts that slander GraphenOS.
IIRC the company tried to become a major mobile operating system in the BRICS countries, which led to Rostelecom, the Russian state telecom operator, purchasing a majority state in the company in the mid-2010s. After Russia invaded Ukraine, the company's management started a new company and moved all their employees and IP over to it to escape the Russian ownership.
I know the people behind SailfishOS, they’re not like, friends or anything: just ex-Nokia developers who got fucked by Microsoft (like I did, btw, which is how I know of them).
I feel like the big tech smartphone duopoly would have a reason to spread such rubbish, but its so patently obvious that I doubt they are so stupid.
It’s a sensitive topic for the US because it is an an EU-backed and funded project to move away from US tech, which undermines US interests globally. which is why you might see some unusually intense anger/vitriol hurled their way and Goebbels-level fabrications
(I actually couldn't find information on their nationality, they might be e.g. Ukrainian or second-generation Russian immigrants; Micay is somewhat Russian-sounding too, btw, although I think he's known to have been born in Canada).
I don't think this is true at all? AOSP is completely open source modulo driver blobs (which Sailfish has too) and Google services.
One can make a fully functional system, modulo drivers, out of only open-source components using AOSP. It's not possible to do this using Sailfish; the compositor, UI libraries (Silica), and most of the "core" apps are still closed source.
Ahh, thanks for the correction, it's the window manager that's closed (lipstick-jolla-home). Regardless, I will stand by my statement that a fully open-source build of AOSP is significantly more complete and useful than a fully open-source build of Jolla.
If we're going to start counting forks, we get to count LineageOS and GrapheneOS for Android, and then the goalposts really move.
A pure AOSP distribution is now lacking a lot of basic apps. Distributions like LineageOS or GrapheneOS fill the gap with their own, but pure AOSP is totally unusable.
I think people got too used to bundling by Apple and Google. For most of the core apps there are good and open source alternatives available.
The main point is that AOSP as a system (modulo firmware) is open source and SailfishOS is not. Also, even though Sailfish has an Android compatibility layer (though only for official devices), compatibility is most likely always going to be worse than 'real' Android.
That said, I hope that Jolla Phone becomes a success, more competition is good. Hopefully being funded better will move them to fully open source the base system.
The Email app had been forked into K-9 Mail, which later became Thunderbird for Android. AOSP Browser no longer made sense to develop after Chromium was ported to Android. And so on. The barebones applications in AOSP have been succeeded by better open source apps outside the AOSP repos. It doesn't make sense to maintain them when nobody putting together an Android distribution would choose to use them over those alternatives.
Because no one was using them. Everyone was replacing them and shipping other apps. AOSP is very modular and customizable letting you configure what apps get included in the OS.
Edit: I'm well aware of the differences between typical Linux and Android (especially the security architecture!), and I'm willing to make some sacrifices in the name of FOSS... but only if it's actually FOSS.