asked 2013-12-30 11:45:57 +0200
Paid apps support in the Sailfish.
commented below:
Hi there, we are actively working on something but we don't have anything to announce at this point. I know this is not what you want to hear exactly, but that's the best "some words" I can offer right now... cybette (Apr 9 '15)edit
answered 2015-01-07 19:41:13 +0200
It's just amazing how this topic (started by Jolla themselves more than a year ago) has never since then gotten any update or comment from Jolla, unlike countless other threads. One of the most voted for requests (within top 20 out of 9100 or so) and such an important one (I guess that availability of decent amount of high quality native apps will be crucial for Sailfish OS' fate) and no word of official information since ever, neither here nor anywhere else.
I make paid apps. Sorry to annoy all those who belive that all software should be free, please however note that I do not force, nor even just convince, anyone to buy them. Yet apparently there are people who find my apps worth paying for cosidering that they used to sell really well on Symbian and Harmattan, with mostly 4/5 to 5/5 ratings, and so it is now also on BB10, so I guess that also on Sailfish OS they'd have their satisfied users.
My point is, I ported all apps of mine to Sailfish OS already in early 2013 when the first SDK came out. Firstly to Qt4.8/QtQuick 1, then again to Qt5/QtQuick2. I made the effort (twice) so early because I really wanted to support this platform with my apps (despite knowing that it would be a tiny platform not able to bring any measurable revenues). One of them was even shown in a Jolla phone demo presented by Marc Dillon in 2013, as it was one of just a few applications ported to Jolla at that time. Guess what, it's been now almost two years since they've been ready for release for Sailfish OS, and there's still no way to distribute them, and not even any kind of reliable information when (or if at all) it might happen. And it's not just lack of support for paid apps, but also lack of support for many required Qt libs and QML imports in the Harbour, so actually I wouldn't get them approved in the Jolla store even for free.
Having waited for so long, I got myself interested in BB10 instead. And on BB10 during those 2 years I enhanced/modified most of my applications to such a degree that now it would take to port them to Sailfish OS from scratch once again. Which, as time passes, I've been getting less and less eager to do.
Long story short, if Jolla still keep all developers so TOTALLY uninformed and uncertain (without at least clear and reliable information about their plans) for a few more months, majority of those still waiting will leave for good, and as they get involved with some other platforms like BB10 or maybe soon Ubuntu, they won't bother to come back even if this pitiful situation ever changes.
I am saying this in a good faith. It is really a SICK situation that for more than a year developers have to keep hundreds or maybe thousands of their apps (there's TEN of such apps from me alone) unreleased while the platform is so badly missing quality native apps taking full advantage of Sailfish OS-unique features like Active Covers, etc., working at full speed, properly multitasking, and resource efficient, unlike all that Android cr*p. Only months ago as Nokia locked the Ovi store, many Symbian and Harmattan developers were willing to quickly port their apps to Jolla (as it is quick and easy) but by now (that there is still not even AN INFORMATION) they just gave up and went BB10, Android, whatever else. Few months more and hardly anyone will remain.
Now feel free to scold me for saying the painful truth (after having patiently waited for even just information since March 2013 or so).
This site isn't really meant for developers, it's best to ask in the dev mailing lists if you want to know how far/close we are to getting support for paid applications: https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/
nthn ( 2015-01-07 20:15:33 +0200 )edit@ nthn Isn't this topic about support for paid apps? Wasn't it launched by Jolla themselves to get opinions about this very thing? That's exactly what I am discussing, and by posting this I am also trying to encourage everyone else to express their opinions to make Jolla see if people need support for paid apps, or else they may think that no one needs it. I guess it's high time to make this a publicly and widely discussed issue.
As for the dev mailing list, this question regularly appears there. Last time I've seen a response from Jolla was April 2014 when they said their goal was H2 2014. It was actually the only response from Jolla on this topic. Clearly, it's not something they consider crucial for the platform's future. So maybe if regular users start talking about it it'll finally make Jolla give any hints.
my-jolla ( 2015-01-07 20:30:55 +0200 )editmy hypothesis is that jolla simply doesn't have the manpower to handle everything needed for this young fledgling company at the same time. manning a crazy massive fundamentally critical effort like paid app ecosystem must be hard to hire for. i am also not aware of any solid data on how having a reasonably good android experience out of the box simply pushes native apps back as a priority, because the android experience put bluntly is good enough for the majority.
either way, i'm giving these guys a reasonably long amount of time to do whatever it takes to survive and carry on.
lkraav ( 2015-01-07 20:36:51 +0200 )edit@ Ikraav This may indeed be the case. But maybe they simply aim too high, in terms of either being able to make something perfect or not at all. I mean, why not start with something really simple, and then gradually improve/enhance it. For me, it would be much better than not ever starting it at all. And if anyone (either a developer or a user) has any security/privacy concerns, no one can force him to sell or buy any applications in such a store until it grows up to meet his expectations, right?
The Ovi/Nokia Store never provided any content protection (the only protection was that files weren't directly downloadable but automatically installable, but an average kid knew how to intercept the .sis or .deb file and do with it whatever he wanted), it had dreadful customer and developer support, painfully long QA and many other drawbacks, but it was one of the biggest app stores out there and if you asked any Symbian/Harmattan user if he rather preferred not to have any app store than this dreadful Ovi store, everyone's answer would have been obvious. So, again, why not start with something as simple as the Ovi store was, and then just keep improving it, rather than postponing the launch until all developers leave and no one remains to launch the app store for.
Finally, please also note that an app store is an additional source of income. App store operators usually take 30% of each sale. Jolla is not a huge platform so it certainly wouldn't make them rich, but it would quite probably at least cover all the costs of running the app store (including the manpower needed for that). So as for now it is kind of a closed circle - they're not launching the store due to not having manpower (i.e. simply funds) to do it, while if they launched the app store it would at least bring funds to have the manpower to run it, and over time (due to the positive effects of having a growing number of apps and thanks to it a growing number of users attracted to the platform by availability of good native apps) it would eventually start bringing profits.
Also, I wouldn't call a basic support for paid apps a "fundamentally critical effort". Having maintained a huge Symbian site in the past, in 2001 I launched on it the first ever online store with paid Symbian (Nokia 9210 Communicator) apps and I ran it just by myself until mid 2003 when Handango offered me to operate a store for my site. It was as easy as signing an agreement with a company processing online credit card payments, and they even provided all the scripts needed to integrate their service with the store and an SSL certificate. It was in 2001, 14 years ago - if a 28 years old individual like me at that time could have done it, I'm sure Jolla can do it too, and due to how technology progressed since then certainly even easier and quicker. The payment processing company was taking 2%, not a huge part of those 30% that app store operators now take.
As for Android experience, I think your opinion is way too optimistic. Compared to BB10, Android compatibility and experience on the Jolla is (euphemistically speaking) very poor. Besides, if Sailfish OS turns out to be in a longer term a platform with just Android apps, believe me that once the current Jolla phone gets really old and existing users start thinking about an upgrade, a HUGE part of them will come to the obvious conclusion that to only run Android apps an actual Android phone will be a better choice as it will do it faster and will always be compatible with incomparably more apps. And this will be Jolla's end. It is an INSANE idea that any platform can survive based on JUST (inferior) compatibility with some other platform, without any ecosystem of its own.
my-jolla ( 2015-01-07 22:38:23 +0200 )edit@my-jolla Very true what u say, especially the point on the dangers of Jolla's and communies focus or efforts moving towards enhancing the droid-compatibility at the expense of letting the native #SailfishOS user and developer community to struggle to stay a live w/o proper app store features (paid apps, donate function, app store web-site, etc) and having too strict policies for Harbour QA in accepting native apps there. Unless the native app ecosystem grows, Jolla and SailfishOS us doomed to become just another fancy droid-launcher w/o hope of biz/user/dev/collaborator future prospects or continuity of any kind. All we can do is keep this topic (anong some related ones) open and actively voice up and keep on trying to get Jolla acknowledge and respond to this lack in native app provision, develooer support and store/harbour implementation. The fact that Google Play support can and has been hacked into Jolla must be one of the most harmfull feata for SailfisOS and Jolla community and company, cause any effort used to promote and enhance that tight Google integration in Jolla devices will eventually mean the end of SailfishOS as independent, open and unlike OS and community as we know it still today (just barely, however).
foss4ever ( 2015-01-28 03:50:17 +0200 )editanswered 2014-11-21 07:47:31 +0200
Sailfish 2.0 : what is the status for paid apps?
One more reason for adding paid apps : provide a safe way to donate. In our (GiuliettaSW's) experience, we have noticed MANY people not donating due to security concerns. This is a big blocker IMO for fund raising.
tortoisedoc ( 2014-12-02 16:46:05 +0200 )editIt would be interesting to hear those reasons, at least for me.
tortoisedoc ( 2015-01-27 13:27:27 +0200 )edit@tortoisedoc: Something like this is unacceptable and it happens frequently: https://www.mailpile.is/blog/2013-09-05_PayPal_Freezes_Campaign_Funds.html
piratenpanda ( 2015-02-06 16:57:34 +0200 )editanswered 2014-11-23 10:56:37 +0200
Because of missing native paid apps, I already spent about 60€ in Android apps installed onto my Jolla, only 5€ for ONE native app. Let's assume 50,000 Jolla users did the same. That would represent a loss of earnings for the Jolla ecosystem of about three million euro... I think Jolla and Myriad's Aliendalvik are a cash cow for Android business, fed by the Jolla community.
Very good point. Also, we can see top developers like coderus and nieldk struggling to keep up with development due to difficulties to find funding.
tortoisedoc ( 2014-11-23 13:07:04 +0200 )editanswered 2015-01-26 19:48:32 +0200
Well, guys, this discussion makes little sense if Jolla stubbornly pretends not to see it. It is now the THIRTEENTH most voted for topic on this site out of 9200 or so (with just some 15 votes missing to be in the top ten), with ALL the remaining popular topics getting Jolla's response. Just not this one, which is even more frustrating considering that it was started by Jolla themselves (and then never again commented on / referred to with a single word, for 13 months now).
It's not that they're not launching the support for paid apps. It's first of all that they totally refuse to talk about it, as if it was a TABOO subject. The situation would look completely different if we were at least properly informed about their plans - whether at all they're planning to ever do it, and if so then what's the current status of things and when do they hope to have it ready. Even in case of delays, a simple status update would be enough, at least showing that someone works on it at all.
But no. They've chosen to completely ignore this problem and all those waiting for any information. This question was asked multiple times in many places over the past two years, and the ONLY time they've ever responded was a short one-line comment from some Jolla guy on their developer mailinglist in APRIL 2014. Never before, and never again, they bothered to say A WORD on this.
Marc Dillon has just launched a blog covering their plans and goals. Guess what, not a single word about support for paid apps can be found there.
It is simply RUDE and DISRESPECTFUL to treat like this all those developers waiting for YEARS (yes, it's been YEARS now since people like me ported their apps to Sailfish OS in early 2013 hoping to be able to release them soon) for even just a small piece of information. No one forces Jolla to provide support for paid apps - it's their platform and they can do with it whatever they want. But so stubbornly and insolently refusing to even just INFORM whether developers should be still wasting their time waiting for them to say A WORD is just unacceptable.
Kindly note: I am NOT in any way demanding the actual support for paid apps. I am only expecting JUST ABOUT ANY INFORMATION. Nothing more than a simple: should we still wait or should we go. Please don't tell me that after TWENTY MONTHS of waiting such expectations are exaggerated.
It is completely irrelevant that Jolla is a "small and poor company". It does not take Microsoft's budget and Google's staff to just PROPERLY INFORM - even just post a short response/update in this thread from time to time (or simply clearly state that they are NOT going to ever provide it), that's all it takes. Wasn't it all meant to be widely open to the community voice and transparent? Being an individual freelance developer I am "small and poor" too, and clearly no one from Jolla gives a flying ** about such developers (even though we are willing to SUPPORT this platform -- despite it not being able to provide us with any measurable profit), so I am no longer buying that "small and poor" sh*t.
I guess I'll give them another month or two max, and then I'll just go. We're not turtles, we can't live 120 years waiting for Jolla to even just tell us if they are ever going to let us release our apps for their platform or not. We wanted to support this platform with our apps, but all we got in response was total silence. I'd keep waiting if I could at least see that anyone wants developers like me on this platform. But if all we get back is total silence then it actually means "get lost, this platform doesn't need you".
I do agree with my-jolla's general thrust - the lack of response from Jolla is a bit bewildering. Even a 'we're working on it' or 'there's other things we need to do first' or anything would be helpful, rather than the silence. The lack of native apps is a bit of a problem, not a huge one because of Android cover, but still, I'd rather use a native app than an Android one, not least because I guess most people here bought a Jolla precisely because they didn't want to rely entirely on Android/IOS etc for their apps and whatnot.
I would be more than happy to see a Jolla store that is as my-jolla (I think it was him/her) has stated in the past - contains some paid-for apps that have passed a high QA standard, and genuinely enrich the Jolla experience. Either that, or have a prominent 'donate' button instead of a 'buy' button. Either way would see the number of native apps increase - and furthermore, the strict QA method could well mean that the Jolla store would see a rise in decent, well made apps and not +00,000's of poorly made, pointless apps that just provide app-store fodder.
Highmore ( 2015-01-26 20:44:08 +0200 )editCheck the last sentences: https://together.jolla.com/question/77783/why-do-i-need-an-account-to-access-jolla-store/?answer=77860#post-id-77860
nthn ( 2015-01-26 20:47:46 +0200 )edit@nthn While I am EXTREMELY grateful for the link you provided, my point still stands.
It is just a very basic side note in a response to a question about something different, merely a short mention, hard to find by all those interested specifically in it, and it does not say absolutely anything but what they said in April 2014, almost a quotation.
As I wrote, I think I am really not exaggerating that I expect (after so many months of patiently waiting) that this topic finally gets a SERIOUS treatment from Jolla. Not a one-line reply once a year deep inside some thread (about something completely different) on Jolla's mailinglist, not a side note in an answer to some other unrelated question on this site (while this very thread has been created by themselves specifically to cover this topic and for months it has been within top 20 most voted for topics, now 11th of all, really hard to miss), and merely just stating that "they're working on it and consider it a corner stone", which is what I've heard already a year ago. It takes a SERIOUS, informative, official statement, and an open discussion.
For big developer companies it is of absolutely no problem (and interest) whether Jolla will allow paid apps or not. They make big money elsewhere, and probably won't ever bother to do anything for this small platform. It is small developer companies and individual freelance developers who Jolla needs to take care of, as only them will want to support this tiny ecosystem and help it grow. And for them the time they spent on getting familiar with the platform, waiting months (or years) to finally be able to release their apps, and so on, directly translates to lost other opportunities and lost income that they would have made if they spent that time elsewhere. Jolla really needs to quickly comprehend it or they'll lose such people, for who revenue from app sales is often their main source of income, so whether to keep waiting or stop wasting time becomes an urgent decision to make.
Jolla proved many times that they know well how to properly communicate when it comes to topics which THEY consider important. Some things they say literally ad nauseam - on twitter, facebook, their website, wherever possible. See how they didn't have absolutely any problems with communicating to tens of thousands of people that they're launching a tablet, or many other things like that. Only this topic has since ever been treated so poorly that such a one sentence long mention deep inside some other thread makes us almost climaxing that they said ANYTHING about it after 10 months of silence.
But OK, I'm giving them one more credit of hope and I'll wait another month or two. Then, if nothing changes, I'll just go with no further complaints.
On a different note, as for "The lack of native apps is a bit of a problem, not a huge one because of Android cover, but still", well, on BlackBerry 10 people also were using Android apps until native apps started coming in decent amounts. But now that tens of thousands of native apps are available for BB10, everyone very clearly prefers native ones, and Android apps are used only where a native one still isn't available yet. And that even though BB10's Android compatibility is FAR more superior than Jolla's. Even better, BlackBerry also has a "Built for BlackBerry" program which only accepts apps which pass additional rigourous tests, so that the BfB designation guarantees for an app's superior quality and usability. Once I got some of my apps BfB approved, their sales increased by an order of magnitude. This clearly shows how native apps are MUCH MORE WANTED than Android ones, if they only exist that is. Those who say that Android apps are all Sailfish OS needs just DELUDE themselves because for now they don't have much comparison with how native apps would look better, work faster, integrate with the OS deeper, etc.
my-jolla ( 2015-01-26 23:35:23 +0200 )editanswered 2015-03-21 10:39:52 +0200
Eleven months ago (April 2014) we learned:
Ahoy!!!
We see the payment support in store as a really important part of our developer offering. We are currently working to support payments in our Jolla Store and Harbour but there are a lot of things for us to do. Our current target is to provide you the monetizing possibility durign the 2nd half of 2014.
In the mean time, you have time to get your apps ready, tested and polished. Also, let us know what additional APIs you need for your Harbour app so that by the time payments are available, your app is ready to sail.
Br, Jolla Store team
Above quoted from here. It's about time for Jolla to at least share an update for this.
answered 2017-03-19 18:49:47 +0200
So..... FOUR freaking years since the launch of Sailfish OS, and TWO freaking years after they ensured that "support for paid apps is top priority for them", not only there's still absolutely NOTHING in this regard, but no one from Jolla has even just mentioned a word about it since early 2015 or so. This thread (for years being the top 6th when it comes to the number of votes, out of 16,700 topics on this site) has always been completely ignored by them, too.
As a result, Salfish OS remains the ONLY mobile platform on Earth that does not support paid apps and therefore does not offer ANY incentives for developers to come and make apps for this OS, so they just don't. Which in turn causes that during FOUR years since 2013 this platform got several times less of native apps than what even the ultra-niche Nokia N9 or N900 got in less than 2 years. Read: the least of ALL mobile platforms ever created, including even GEOS of the first Nokia Communicators in the '90s. A few hundred native apps in 4 years is a DISASTER, and it won't ever change unless developers are allowed to monetize their apps on this platform.
This situation is totally incomprehensible for every sane person. What is Jolla's plan? To fully rely on the outdated (and in fact approaching its EOL) Android 4.x runtime forever? Will they ever be able to update it to at least Android 5 and Google Services (that almost all new Android apps now require)? DOUBTFUL, because Google does not permit it to be used by non-OHA members and on devices where Android isn't the host OS. Even BlackBerry wasn't permitted to upgrade their Alien Dalivk Android runtime beyond Android 4.x on their BB10 phones (which eventually killed that OS). So what will Jolla do in a year or two when their Android 4.x runtime becomes as obsolete as what Android 2.x is now, and with no native apps whatsoever? This is the LAST MOMENT to finally start building a strong native ecosystem.
Moreover, due to BB10 demise, it is the last time to try to attract some BB10 developers who are RIGHT NOW forced to look for new platforms to develop for. BB10 is a Qt-based platform like SFOS, so porting apps is easy and quick and not much learning is required for a BB10 developer to get familiar with SFOS. So even if SFOS (due to its size) couldn't offer MUCH revenue for a BB10 developer, that quickness and easiness of porting apps would surely convince many BB10 developers to quickly port their apps to SFOS and earn a few bucks. But if this platform continues not to offer ANY monetizing possibilities, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE will bother. By 2018 all BB10 developers will move to either Android or iOS, and once they make the effort to learn their APIs and establish position on those tough markets, none of them will ever bother to even think about going back to as tiny platform as Jolla.
It's been now FOUR years since I could not stop wondering how such an easy thing as adding payment support to the existing app store has been completely ignored by Jolla. There are countless companies which fully handle the whole online payment process in exchange for a small commission (like 1% or so). As app stores usually take 30%, it would still leave 29% for Jolla, for doing nothing. Even the app testing / QA process would not differ from the one they already do with free apps, either.
Wake up Jolla. Now that BB10 is dying and all BB10 developers are NOW looking for alternatives, it's your LAST chance to be able to attract a large group of existing Qt developers who don't need to learn how to code for a Qt platform and have thousands of apps which could be quickly and easily ported. Ignore it, let them switch to Android or iOS development, and you won't have such possibility EVER AGAIN, because it is the last commercially active Qt-based mobile platform and the last group of Qt developers to reach out for.
And this is also the last time I am asking you. Four years of waiting and so many requests without anyone even bothering to answer is ENOUGH. I've got some 20 high quality apps for BB10, all of them rated 5/5 and very popular. Let me port them to SFOS now, or be well.
and tbh- i really dont get it. as if may be not my no1 wanted feature it should be jollas- as it is an actual way to MAKE some money besides the usual marketing. in fact it would be nice to have some numbers of what kind of cash other app stores create. "JUST" offering a platform seems like an easy way to generate some extra cash.
kaktux ( 2017-03-19 19:23:02 +0200 )editJolla is dead guys. The last big thing was a vendor in India who's supply of available phones sold out very rapidly, according to their own blog. Which is an euphomism for "they got rid of their stock and then quit ASAP". They are forever announcing stuff that if you look after a half a year or so just never seems to have happened. You may have some success with strong-arm regimes like Russia that can force people to use it, but even that remains to be seen. I moved to iPhone and am very content. Quite a change that everyting just works.
FJVA ( 2017-03-19 19:38:20 +0200 )editanswered 2015-04-07 15:41:22 +0200
Hi,
Would be great to hear some news/update on the situation with paid app support from Jolla team. We have less then two months (hopefully) left to SFOS 2 launch with the new Jolla tablet and if there's no possibility for devs to sell their apps, it's hard to expect any real progress in SFOS eco-system development. I think most of us can name a bunch of paid apps he/she misses on Jolla.
I understand that for now all Jolla people are extremly busy with tablet & SFOS 2 preparation to launch, but may be just some words from @cybette?
UPDATE
Half a year passed and now we have support for Flattr. And nothing more. Jolla are you kidding? Is that all and you are really not going to do anything else to implement payed apps in the store? This is just a half measure, not a decision! Why do you insisting so much for us to pay money for apps we need to Google, not to you? I just don't understand.
UPDATE 2
Jolla, if you really desperately need money, why do you still refuse to take it?
@cybette Thanks! Even this is much better then nothing :) Great to hear the work is in progress :)
rburkhanov ( 2015-04-09 23:16:02 +0200 )edit@cybette Thanks for being the first jolla official to write something in this post (the one with the 9th most votes of all) after 15 months (!). But: you can't be serious there is still no roadmap, nothing more tangible to say than "we are doing something but we can't tell you about it". This is the most vague comment possible... I really don't get it. Do you deliberately NOT want to earn money? EVERY other smartphone OS has had an appstore with support for paid apps at the time of the first product's launch (when first iPhone came out, it was not a smartphone). It's an essential part of the ecosystem and an easy way to earn some extra money...
casanunda ( 2015-04-15 13:14:41 +0200 )editYes, even bad news is better than no news, especially on a case which had a schedule earlier. Thanks for sharing, however, I feel sorry for both the developers and the users wanting their top apps. Well, I just hope we'll hear more on this, from you or other sailors, soon. Anything the community can do to help on this @cybette ?
simo ( 2015-04-15 21:28:33 +0200 )editanswered 2014-11-22 19:19:34 +0200
Native Jolla apps are essential. It would be nice if they were free. The mechanism for payment, whether in-app up upfront/separate after trial period should be absolutely clear with no scope for charging users without their knowledge. I think any in-app charging method is too important to be left to developers and a mechanism/rules to avoid mischarging should be standardised by Jolla if posible.
Agreed; in-app purchase system supported by Jolla would be perfect.
tortoisedoc ( 2014-11-22 23:55:07 +0200 )editMaybe an interesting example is QuasarMx (www.meteorasoftworks.com): lite (free) version plus Pro (5 euro) version. The only one native paid app AFAIK.
objectifnul ( 2014-11-23 10:21:43 +0200 )editA similar service operated by jolla and offered to developers would be perfect.
tortoisedoc ( 2014-11-23 13:06:00 +0200 )editanswered 2014-05-08 12:48:02 +0200
Hey Sailors,
Land ahoy!
Take a look at this. SailfishDevel
I hope the support for paid apps will come before 1st anniversary at Nov 27th.
Happy sailing.
2017 here. I wonder if that guy still works at Jolla, at all... :(
spidernik84 ( 2017-04-07 14:15:34 +0200 )editanswered 2015-04-14 17:51:13 +0200
First of all, it's a inconsistency of Jolla philosophy around business. Their philosophy is: I'll do a platform were the only one that makes business is me... but eeeey! help me, give money, trust me... someday in a galaxy far far away you will. Jolla is in the market to make money, and as far as I can see, and understand, they are wolves in sheep's.
Let me argue... First of all, I guess that jolla has sold no more than 10k units of the phone, with just about 6k to 8k customers. The Tablet, it's easy, almost every single jolla phone customer bought the tablet. So, if you have a market of 10k customers, with an outdated phone, an ecosystem that has no apps that are useful, after 2 years... WTF is a tablet nowadays? a tablet without apps to install, for web browsing more than 200 euro? come on!!! Buying now a Jolla phone is burning 250 euro...
The inconsistency is that they ask for money, but they don't want developers make money with the platform. I'll give you an example: In the latest video, the Jolla tablet people powered claim, the COO Marc Dillon, asks for money to make things happen, as a result a tablet... So I tell you Mr.Dillon that if you want quality apps,involced third party developers, they need time, and time is money for everyone, besides Jolla things that it isn't. inconsistency is false promises, Angry birds, United, blabla... Even jolla apps are outdated (calendar, contacts, messaging...) are terrible! make the adjective "smartphone" in Jolla be so overrated...
Give a reason, why as a developer should invest a minute developing a native app. They do not appeal to make business because they want to get the money of a few fans, that misunderstand what's the meaning of open, secure, blabla... How many TOH have they sold? how many Stella Phone have they sold? giving no chance to buy the Stella as TOH? another pickpocket action as an example...
My answer is that they run out of money, they don't have time, and are waiting an acquisition from Nokia again or Samsung, or whatever company... and they just have the money of loyal fans... that believe the claim...
Jolla executives, just have the emotional claim nowadays, nothing else. Third party developers are doing much more than Jolla employers and executives. The platform is dead already. They need to fire the CEO and COO, and leave them as a GURU, or philosophers, nothing else. Jolla needs executives that know how to monetize open platforms.
They need to open the ecosystem, and give power to the developers, the ones that fill the store, the ones that give solutions to customers.These will make store, jolla products more appealing.
Open, does not mean free, and free does not mean open...
p.d: Airbnb is not a real state, and trades with real state, Facebook does not make content, an it's full of content, Uber has no cars, but sells rides... It's about business, if you ask involving people, you have to know what you offer. can give you lots of examples, that understand that the platform, the environment must help business, were everyone gets their part.
Asked: 2013-12-30 11:45:57 +0200
Seen: 13,208 times
Last updated: Nov 16 '17
I consider it important that pure Sailfish applications can be chargeable. Otherwise there does not arise new ecosystem. Pay compensation produce the quality and the motivation to do more native Sailfish applications.
Tuokki ( 2014-01-02 23:06:39 +0200 )editi hope they do not implement in app purchases!!! i tend to stay away from these applications as i feel being taken hostage for some silly feature!
skrokhmal ( 2014-01-03 22:58:27 +0200 )edit@shrokhmal Hmm, on the contrary I think in-app purchases are even more important than supporting paid apps. I don't generally install apps that want money before I can even try them, but I'd gladly upgrade to become a paying user using an in-app purchase when I enjoy using a certain app.
Thorbjørn ( 2014-01-03 23:27:16 +0200 )editdeveloper releases an upgrade to an application with some little addition and requires to pay for this addition, and then again and then again? he already got my support by me paying for an app, why would i want to pay for updates? just being greedy. we all have our opinions!
skrokhmal ( 2014-01-04 01:03:04 +0200 )edit@skrokhmal you should develop an app or two, put them on a marketplace (any), and then write a blog post about your feelings once you've been to the other side. The market will sort out the so called "overly greedy" in time. No need to get mad at anybody trying to earn a living with a useful app.
lkraav ( 2014-01-04 01:09:08 +0200 )edit