SYMBIAN OS SECTION
  -My-Symbian.com-
MAEMO  SECTION
-My-Maemo.com-
MEEGO  SECTION
-My-MeeGo.com-
SOFTWARE STORECONTACT


My-Symbian.com Forums

 
My-Symbian ~ My-Maemo ~ My-MeeGo
Symbian & Linux based Communicator and Smartphone Info Center
The Oldest Symbian Community Website - Since 1999
 
 Watched TopicsWatched Topics   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RulesRules   Log inLog in 
Lightweight, simplified version of the forumsMobile version
Jolla harbour(store)

Go to page
1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    My-Symbian ~ My-Maemo ~ My-MeeGo Forum Index -> Jolla Sailfish OS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ketilk
Site supporter
Site supporter

Please add your avatar!

Joined: 19 Dec 2011

Posts: 508

Thanks received:
50 in 45 posts
Thanks given: 6


Phone: Jolla, N9 , N900, N97-mini

PostPosted: Wednesday, 06.Nov.2013 16:47    Post subject: Jolla harbour(store)   Reply with quote   

Jolla have now opened the Jolla harbour for application submission.

Mailing list wrote:
Ahoy all,

Today we're launching Jolla Harbour <harbour.jolla.com>, the portal for submitting applications to the Jolla Store.
You can submit and manage your applications. Consumers will be able to install them directly from their Jolla phones.

Here are some details about Jolla Harbour:

Joining and logging into Jolla Harbour:
Joining is free! You can create a Jolla account from the Jolla Harbour landing page (harbour.jolla.com) or if you have pre-ordered your Jolla phone, you have everything you need to get started. To manage your account details, please visit account.jolla.com.

Support for Sailfish and Android™ applications:
You can submit both Sailfish and Android™ applications to Jolla Harbour. The submission process is the same.

Start with free applications:
At launch, the Jolla Harbour and Jolla Store will support only free applications. We are working hard to enable payment solutions and we will keep you posted about these capabilities as they develop.

Binary package naming:
You will receive naming guidelines when you upload the binary package to Jolla Harbour. You can also find guidelines on versioning at http://semver.org.

Preparing your metadata:
Jolla Harbour needs to know a few things about your app:
- An app icon for the Store (86x86px, png) (Current SDK supports 90x90px images; more details to follow soon)
- 1-3 screenshots (540x960px, png or jpg)
- An optional Cover image for your Store page (516x252px, png or jpg)

Submission process:
To submit your application to Jolla Harbour, fill in the metadata for it and upload the binary and required images. After you have submitted your app, Jolla will start Quality Assurance testing.

Quality Assurance testing:
Jolla will perform QA testing on your applications on real Jolla devices. We will get back to you with feedback on your app within a few days. You will be notified on the QA results via the email address you have registered to your Jolla account.


If you encounter any issues, please contact us by email, developer-care@jolla.com, or report them to the Sailfish developers mailing list at devel at lists.sailfishos.org.

Happy hacking!
The Jolla Store Team


I had some trouble opening their website, but this url worked for me: https://harbour.jolla.com/. I kind of think they have some troubles with the website because it doesn't always work, not been able to sign in. I really recommend reading the other mails about jolla harbour in theMailing list archives.

I really like their name for it Smile
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Wednesday, 06.Nov.2013 18:18    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Good news. Thanks for posting!

I cannot enter the store at the moment. I get either a blank page or a "Bad request" screen. Nevertheless, it's good to see that they're working on it.

I couldn't check the store itself yet, but based on your quote I have the following remarks, which I think I'll also post on the Sailfish mailinglist:

- up to 3 screenshots is way too little. It looks that they are following the Ovi Store's specs, but it is probably the worst example to follow. With 3 screenshots per app and description limited to 500 characters, it has always been a MAJOR problem to properly present any application in the Nokia store - in most cases it wasn't enough to even just list full application's functionality. Just to compare, the Blackberry store supports up to 64 screenshots and 4000 characters of description. I'd say that 64 screenshots is an exaggeration, but at least FIVE is a MUST. I am also going to suggest that they allow publishers to post responses to people's comments/reviews - lack of which has been another major problem of the Nokia store, disallowing ANY communication with customers.

I know that it is just the beginning, but my experience tells me that if something isn't done at start then it it usually never comes or takes ages to be added.

Anyway, I've got 4 applications fully ported now, but I don't think I am ready to submit them before I can test them myself on a real device, because all of them use things like GPS, sensors, etc., none of which can be tested in the emulator. So, Jolla, PLEASE, provide a developer unit so that I can test my apps, and within the next 2 weeks you'll get NINE submissions from me alone....
Back to top
Casanunda
Site supporter
Site supporter



Joined: 01 Dec 2009

Posts: 434

Thanks received:
52 in 48 posts
Thanks given: 319


Phone: n900, Jolla

PostPosted: Wednesday, 06.Nov.2013 19:26    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Let's hope problems on harbour.jolla.com are due to overwhelming demand Smile

https://twitter.com/JollaHQ/status/398049205781946368 seems do indicate this.

I understand your criticism Michal.
What comes to my mind on top when I read that announcement:

- No commercial apps in the beginning: while it fits the open source, community driven image Jolla has, I think it will become a real problem if no commercial apps are available at phone's launch date. ( I am fine with almost purely free apps on my N900, but that will not be the case for everyone...)

- Metadata: seems a bit half-baked again looking at Icon resolutions: you have to submit 86x86 pixel Icons, but SDK at the moment supports 90x90 pixels. Isn't that something that will be quite annoying for any developer again?

Otherwise: Great to see something is happening.
Quote:

Quality Assurance testing:
Jolla will perform QA testing on your applications on real Jolla devices. We will get back to you with feedback on your app within a few days.

This sounds good. Do you think they will be able to provide real feedback? or only "acceptable" or "not acceptable"?
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Wednesday, 06.Nov.2013 22:17    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Quote:

I understand your criticism Michal.

It's all in a good purpose. I guess that every Nokia store publisher agrees that three screenshots per application is way too little. For more complex applications like SunCalc Premium or StarFinder, I couldn't show even part of the application's functionality. And with description limited to 400 characters I could not fully describe it, either... I always have to choose between either trying to fit as much information as possible (usually in a heavily abbreviated form like '&' instead of every 'and', no spaces after comma or full stop, etc. which looks very unserious) OR posting a link to a page providing full description (with the link taking 1/3rd of allowed character limit, as Nokia doesn't accept shortened links like tinyurl) that no one bothers to check, anyway. So why have such senseless restrictions instead of simply allowing longer description and a few more screenshots.... 400 characters is 400 bytes.... in 2013/2014 it is a restriction from Sinclair ZX81 or Atari 800 XL times...

Quote:

- No commercial apps in the beginning: while it fits the open source, community driven image Jolla has, I think it will become a real problem if no commercial apps are available at phone's launch date. ( I am fine with almost purely free apps on my N900, but that will not be the case for everyone...)

Well.... considering that all my applications are commercial, it looks that at this point I will not be able to submit anything, anyway....

And considering that Jolla surely needs some cash, I think it should be their priority to quickly allow commercial apps and thus start earning on it...

One more thing: by initially only allowing free apps to be submitted they make it possible for the store to get FLOODED with free Android apps before any noticeable number of native apps gets submitted... I guess that not many developers have their native Sailfish OS apps ready for publication already now (also due to no developer units to test them) while tens of thousands of Android apps are just waiting to be submitted (and not necessarily by their legit authors, but actually by anyone, like in the BB store where you can often find 3-4 copies of the same application published by 3-4 different people and none of them being its author).

I hope that they will at least provide some method to distinguish/filter native apps...

Quote:

- Metadata: seems a bit half-baked again looking at Icon resolutions: you have to submit 86x86 pixel Icons, but SDK at the moment supports 90x90 pixels. Isn't that something that will be quite annoying for any developer again?

Yes, I've also noticed that. Strangely, every app store I use requires icons of different size than used on the platform whose applications it offers. The Nokia store requires at least 256x256 pixels, the BlackBerry store even bigger (don't remember now, but something like 400x400 or more) only to then show them.... shrinked back to 80x80. When publishing my apps in the Nokia Store, I simply resize the original 80x80 icon to 256x256 (which obviously degrades its quality) and then they.... shrink it back to 80x80 Razz

Quote:

This sounds good. Do you think they will be able to provide real feedback? or only "acceptable" or "not acceptable"?

The Nokia store QA does provide an explanation of why an application was rejected, so I guess Jolla will provide it, too. But obviously it cannot replace being able to first test an application on a real device.... If you have an access to the phone then you can simply thoroughly test yourself if everything works fine. Otherwise, it is a long and painful process: you submit an untested app, after 3-4 days (or more including weekends) of QA process they find a bug and report it to you, you correct it, resubmit the app and after another 3-4 days they find another issue, and so on. This way it may take weeks.

So I deeply hope that they will soon start providing developer units. I guess that nine applications of mine, with over 5000 copies sold and mostly 4-5 star ratings, are worth letting me test and quickly submit them....
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Thursday, 07.Nov.2013 00:01    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

I've posted my comments on the Sailfish OS mailinglist as well:

https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/2013-November/001028.html

And I've also posted some questions regarding planned app purchase (payment) options and what kind (if any) of software protection/activation/registration will be supported.

https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/2013-November/001033.html

I think it's important to ask such questions while everyone on that list only talks about how the store will handle dependencies.
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Thursday, 07.Nov.2013 13:37    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Ronni of Jolla has just responded to my post on the mailinglist:

https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/2013-November/001035.html

It seems that in general they liked the suggestions. And activation keys automatically generated by the store (based on publisher-submitted phrase and customer device's IMEI) as suggested by me actually turns out to be something very close to what they're planning to offer, as Ronni said:

"Your guess about phrase based activation keys that use devices unique identifier part of the key is pretty accurate (at least current copy protection library implementation is quite near of that, but I cannot promise if final implementation will be)."

The only thing that seriously worries me is how Ronni described their plans of adding support for commercial applications at the Harbour. He wrote:

"Currently Jolla Harbour only supports free applications. We are working hard on adding copy protection and application payment support in the future. More details will be published when functionality is ready... Smile"

How he wrote "in the future" (and not in 'near future', 'soon', etc.) somehow sounds to me as if it wasn't going to be anytime soon. "In the future" usually means months.... Which would be a real pity, as my porting work is progressing so quickly that I will have all my applications fully ported within the next week, and that with some nice new functionality in every application, like e.g. active covers. What a bummer it would be if I had 9-10 useful apps for Sailfish OS 100% ready for distribution, and I could not distribute them while the platform so badly needs at launch as much native software as possible...
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Friday, 08.Nov.2013 00:48    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Another good news posted by Ronni of Jolla on the mailinglist is that Jolla (unlike Nokia) finally PROPERLY understands the need for a copy-protection in the app store.

There will be a copy protection library available to developers. Everyone will be free to use it or not, so it will be every developer's choice to have (or not to have) a copy protection in his application.

As Ronni wrote, "copy protection library is just supposed to make cracking and copying process hard enough so that most of the people will just choose to use store for getting their rpm's. And to give app developers easier ways to give some protection their applications so direct .rpm file copy from device to device wont work, so you don't have to invent the wheel again and again by creating their own copy protection solutions."

Furthermore, the store will apparently be able to recognize if cracked applications are installed on a phone and in such case such phone will be BLACKLISTED from using the store, which looks like another good way to discourage people from using cracked copies.

"And if you have a danger of beeing blacklisted from Store if your detected of using cracked applications it also might scare some people from using cracked apps."
Back to top
spyder81
Site supporter
Site supporter

Please add your avatar!

Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Posts: 101

Thanks received:
17 in 12 posts
Thanks given: 20


Phone: 31648778428

PostPosted: Friday, 08.Nov.2013 01:19    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Michal, compliments for your questions and suggestions towards the Sailfish OS mailinglist. It's important that Jolla get the things right at the beginning. They have the advantage that hey can learn from the not so good things in Nokia Store. I hope that Jolla brings a store where developers and customers can use it with satisfaction.
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Monday, 11.Nov.2013 03:22    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Unfortunately, the Sailfish OS mailinglist (besides direct contact with Jolla guys, which is a good thing) seems to be dominated by people known from Maemo.org. "Unfortunately" because while extremely knowledgeable, they seem to be completely fixed on "total and unrestricted openness" and to topics related to any commercial matter they react allergically.

I seem to be the only person on the list who is happy about Jolla planning to introduce copy-protection (something that Nokia never offered); everyone else on that list criticizes it. Even though Jonni of Jolla confirmed twice that the copy-protection will NOT in any way restrict root access, everyone keeps complaining about it "possibly" doing so. They also blame it (before it even exists) of possible "sensitive information leaks", compromising user experience of downloading legal apps, and generally "no sense to make it as it will surely get hacked".

I don't really understand why people who only make free/open source stuff would at all worry about the OPTIONAL (as stated by Jolla's Jonni) copy-protection that they won't need to use (or even remember about its existence) if they don't want to.

I'm quite worried by the fact that the CORE community around Sailfish OS does not seem to understand that this platform HAS to be different than Maemo and Harmattan, i.e. widely open to COMMERCIAL stuff (and not just Linux geek's dreamed-out 100% hackable gadget the N900 was), because it badly needs a COMMERCIAL success in order to survive and grow. To attract developers (especially large reputable companies behind the most wanted apps) the platform needs to offer them protection and support, or else they won't bother.

It puzzles me that these people (while being so knowledgeable) compare Sailfish to iOS or Android and say that copy-protection on Sailfish doesn't make sense because there's no such thing on Android or iOS, which is only half-true. While indeed there is no copy-protection AS SUCH on those platforms, unlike Sailfish OS they come more or less LOCKED and this way they somehow restrict piracy. It takes jailbreaking an iPhone or rooting an Android phone (which is what probably only around 10% of their users do) to access the full file system and use many cracked applications (e.g. all those which need to be patched AFTER installation), or even just be able to install apps from unauthorized sources on iOS. WP is even more locked. Whereas the Jolla will ship completely UNLOCKED out-of-box, it'll only take enabling the developer mode (i.e. switching one menu option) to gain FULL access to every single file and binary on the device (and copy/modify/replace it). And if so, then - obviously - it should offer some other kind of (optional to use on an application level) protection to at least SUBSTITUTE FOR what the other locked platforms restrict by default. Or else, Sailfish OS will be (thanks to its openness, which itself is a great thing) a platform THE MOST VULNERABLE to piracy, i.e. where it will be THE EASIEST to illegally duplicate and then install copyrighted content, simply by COPYING FILES (just like on the N900). And if it is the easiest to pirate (in fact not ANY more difficult or time-consuming than buying an app) then everyone can answer himself how the situation will look like.

Yet no one on that list seems to understand it. I can only hope that Jolla will not change their mind under the influence of those people's opinions and will introduce a (well made, fully transparent to a legal user) copy-protection as planned...

P.S. Seeing on the Sailfish OS mailinglist only those I remember from Maemo.org and/or Meego.com is a worrying thing because it means that so far the platform hasn't attracted any new developers...
Back to top
Ketilk
Site supporter
Site supporter

Please add your avatar!

Joined: 19 Dec 2011

Posts: 508

Thanks received:
50 in 45 posts
Thanks given: 6


Phone: Jolla, N9 , N900, N97-mini

PostPosted: Monday, 11.Nov.2013 07:53    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

I am concerned about how the store will detect illegaly downloaded applications. What if a legal application I have coded and compiled myself is detected as a false positive? Will that only happen if I include the copy-protection library in some way?

What I expect to be able to do with all applications:
1. Be able to backup installation archive before install
2. Be able to backup installed files after install
3. Be able to restore the files from 2 or 3 later
4. Use the application

Most copy protection makes 1-3 inconvenient. It is sad if legal applications have copy protection with lots of restrictions while illegal cracked applications does not have the same restrictions.

Email-validation requires Internet access in the activation phase and I guess it's per application. Binary keys based on IMEI number could work, although it's kind of sad if one phone breaks and you replace it with a new one and have to re-buy all applications. That could be fixed by associating the new phone with the old jolla account and that it would generate new keys for that one.

Would very much prefer that shops were able to trust their customers. I am willing to pay more for unrestricted apps than for restricted apps.
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Monday, 11.Nov.2013 18:57    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

First of all, thank you Ketlik for your post. It is good that we can discuss it. I think it is much better to talk about controversial things and come to some conclusions, rather than just condemn them and cease any further discussion as it seems to have happened on the mailinglist.

Quote:

I am concerned about how the store will detect illegaly downloaded applications. What if a legal application I have coded and compiled myself is detected as a false positive?

As I understand it, the store will only verify applications that USE the copy-protection library, which is meant to be used only in applications to be distributed through the Jolla store. If you compile an application for your own use, or for distribution outside of the Jolla store, you will NOT use the copy-protection in it, and such application will NOT be in any way verified by the store.

In other words, an application that does NOT include copy-protection will NOT be verified by the store AT ALL, and as such it CANNOT be detected as false positive.

It's just that Jolla needs to take good care about preventing easy removal of the copy-protection stuff from an application by hackers, or else the whole thing won't make much sense. Therefore, in addition to inclusion of the copy-protection itself, certain part of the application will need to be additionally encrypted, hashed or whatever else it takes.

Quote:

Will that only happen if I include the copy-protection library in some way?

That's how I understand it. And you will not have any reasons to ever use copy-protection in an application that you do not indend to sell through the Jolla store, right? So it will NOT be subject to any verification at all.

As Jonni of Jolla stated, the copy-protection is going to be ENTIRELY OPTIONAL, i.e. not using it in one's application will not have ANY side-effects or impose any restrictions. Those who don't need it can just forget about its existence. Furthermore, even in applications to be sold through the Jolla store, the copy-protection will ALSO be fully optional, meaning that if one doesn't want to protect his commercial applications then he doesn't need to do it. Therefore, I can't see any reasons to worry at the developers' end, and surely not by those who will not use the copy-protection and therefore whose applications will not be in ANY way ever touched by it.

Quote:

What I expect to be able to do with all applications:
1. Be able to backup installation archive before install
2. Be able to backup installed files after install
3. Be able to restore the files from 2 or 3 later
4. Use the application

Most copy protection makes 1-3 inconvenient.

I expect the copy-protection to protect applications at RUNTIME. An application (protected with the library) simply needs to have a valid activation for that phone to be able to WORK. Other than that, its files can be freely copied/backed up/restored, etc., including the file/database containing the activation data and everything else.

This way it will not in any way prevent one from making full backup or restore, and if restored (along with its activation data, to the same phone) it will continue to work after restore, thus not requiring any re-activation.

Jonni of Jolla confirmed that root access will remain unlimited (providing full access to every file and binary on the device), so I can't see how the copy-protection could restrict backup or restore.

As a developer, I don't really care if someone can copy my application, as long as he cannot RUN it on an unauthorized device.

Quote:

It is sad if legal applications have copy protection with lots of restrictions while illegal cracked applications does not have the same restrictions.

If the activation process is automatic and transparent right after download/purchase, and if as long as the activation data is on the device (and matches that device's IMEI, ID or whatever else) the application simply works and any online verification only takes place (and is also fully transparent and automatic) when one connects to the Jolla store, I can't see how the copy-protection would be imposing any restrictions (other than illegally distributing the application of course). If only done so, I think that legal users might not even notice its existence.

Quote:

Email-validation requires Internet access in the activation phase and I guess it's per application.

I don't think it needs to be an email based activation, or any such oldfashioned way. I expect it to be fully automatic. You buy an application, it gets downloaded and installed from the store, and right after that it is being automatically activated and remains so as long as activation data is on the device.

Should anything ever happen that wipes the activation data then you simply connect to the store (by simply launching its client), log in to your account, and the store (which "knows" all the application you purchased from it) simply checks if all activations are valid on your device and automatically re-activates missing ones.

What kind of problem can that be?

Quote:

although it's kind of sad if one phone breaks and you replace it with a new one and have to re-buy all applications.

Whether you need to re-buy or not doesn't really depend on the copy-protection itself, but much more on the store's (or each individual developer's) policy. Even now in the Nokia Store (which doesn't use any copy-protection) re-downloading paid apps is limited to 5 times or so and then you need to re-buy...

I'd expect that in case of a phone failure/replacement you can email Jolla (there should be a special contact form or email for this), inform the store about phone replacement and request them to enable activation for your new phone's IMEI.

I think that even stores which do not use any additional copy protection (e.g. the Apple store) still record customer's phone IMEI and allow re-downloading of apps or re-activating them only for that same IMEI, and otherwise need to be contacted to request a change of the IMEI (or device ID) number associated with customer's store account... So it doesn't really have much to do with the copy-protection library itself.

Anyway, I think it can be done even easier: without contacting the Jolla store staff at all, the customer could be allowed to change the IMEI (or device ID) number associated with his account ONCE or TWICE, simply in his account's profile. Changing the IMEI would blacklist the old one (why would one ever need it if the phone really got replaced) so that no one would do it to get duplicate copies for another phone as otherwise he would no longer be able to buy anything for the previously used IMEI... As easy (and obvious) as that.

Quote:

That could be fixed by associating the new phone with the old jolla account and that it would generate new keys for that one.

Exactly.

Quote:

Would very much prefer that shops were able to trust their customers.

Would very much prefer that people don't steal. But if I see dozens of websites each with number of downloads of my applications higher than the number of copies ever sold, and platforms like Jolla or Harmattan are so tiny that you can only count on a FEW HUNDRED of copies sold and the rest is piracy, then somehow your belief in a good and honest world gets spoiled and you start looking for ways to protect just about ANY revenue for your work...

And it's funny how on the mailinglist people say that it's because apps are too expensive. Nokia sells my applications in India (20% of this world's population) for $0.08 (not $0.8 but $0.08!) i.e. twenty times cheaper than anywhere else, and they still pirate them. Could there be any lower price than that, other than NO PRICE, to make them stop, and if not then isn't the copy-protection the only remaining way to at least attempt to restrict it?

Quote:

I am willing to pay more for unrestricted apps than for restricted apps.

If the copy-protection is done the way I suggested above (transparent and automatic to the legal user), I am not sure if you will be able to easily distinguish those protected from those unprotected, as none of them will be really "restricted" in any way while legally used, unless you try to copy it to an unauthorized device and find it not working (i.e. what it is MEANT to do). No other restrictions come to my mind.


To sum up, I expect the copy-protection to work the following way:

- the use is fully optional (as confirmed by Jolla), those who don't want it don't need to use it at all without any side-effects whatsoever other than their apps simply not being protected (and thus not in any way verified by the store)

- at compile time, the developer includes the copy-protection library and e.g. a passphrase for that application. Certain (required to work) parts of the application get encrypted or in some other way hashed to disallow easy removal of copy protection. The passphrase is then entered in the store to be used for the activation for each specific IMEI/device ID.

- activation is fully automatic. Once you buy an app, it gets automatically activated by the store right after installation, fully transparent to the user. No email, keying in any codes, etc.

- the protection does not in any way prevent backup or restore. Files (including activation database) can be copied, backed up, restored. Everything works as long as activation is on the phone and matches the IMEI / device ID (or whatever else) of that phone. If absent/incorrect, the application stops working and the user needs to either restore from backup or connect to the store and easily reactivate (the store should automatically reactivate if upon logging in it detects any missing activations and the IMEI is the same as the one associated with that application's purchase).

- should any data corruption happen and you don't have a backup, you can simply connect to the store and get all your apps purchased from there re-activated in one go. Unlimited times, if only the IMEI / device ID is the same.

- should your phone break and you need replacement (which doesn't happen too often, and almost never more than once per one phone model's lifetime), there should be a direct contact channel with Jolla to request new IMEI being associated with your account. Of course, such changes should be limited to some reasonable number of times. Or, even better, you should be allowed to change the IMEI number associated with your store account yourself (some reasonable number of times), by simply editing your profile; the old IMEI would get blacklisted for good (no one needs IMEI of a dead phone, anyway), thus preventing any abuse.

If done this way, I can't see why anyone would have any reasons to complain as it wouldn't be imposing any restrictions or trouble. And if at the same time the copy-protection succeeded in restricting piracy, it would probably result in LOWER APP PRICES* and MORE DEVELOPERS GETTING ATTRACTED TO THE PLATFORM, which I guess everyone would be benefit from...

* I'd happily reduce all my Harmattan and Symbian applications' prices by half or more if only I could sell more instead of seeing thousands of illegal downloads on warez sites and ending up with just a few hundred of legal sales in total, making the whole business a charity. Therefore, with a good copy-protection restricting piracy, all legal users would BENEFIT from it by purchasing all my apps twice or more cheaper. Isn't that something worth having to wait an additional 0.5 second for automatic activation and then (in worst case) possibly having to reactivate the same way once or twice should they need to reformat their phone?
Back to top
naytsyrhc
Site supporter
Site supporter



Joined: 21 Sep 2006

Posts: 886

Thanks received:
42 in 42 posts
Thanks given: 114

Location: Hamburg, Germany
Phone: History [/// R380s, SE P800, SE P910i, SE M600i, Nokia E71, Nokia N9], Current [Jolla]

PostPosted: Tuesday, 12.Nov.2013 01:03    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

I fully agree with you Michal. let's hope Jolla will provide such copy protection or at least a quite similar one. I don't understand those posts in the mailing list either (read some of them). You said, those are knowledgeable people, but I got the impression they just couldn't see the difference between an OS (security) restricting layer like Aegis and a copy protection library.

I really hope Jolla keeps their course.
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Tuesday, 12.Nov.2013 02:30    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Quote:

I don't understand those posts in the mailing list either (read some of them). You said, those are knowledgeable people, but I got the impression they just couldn't see the difference between an OS (security) restricting layer like Aegis and a copy protection library.

Well, all of them are enthusiasts of free and open source stuff. Which itself is a great thing. Problems start when a person gets so 'fixed' on it that he considers it the only valid way of making any kind of software, and everything else is being considered harmful and inferior. It looks that those people would actually like the Jolla to be mostly just an upgraded N900, i.e. a device still aimed first of all at Linux geeks (letting them enjoy being able to hack it in every possible way without any limits) and not at a NORMAL CONSUMER. Which maybe would be a great thing (like the N900 was) but in such form the phone would end up with market share not bigger than the N900 had, and as little quality commercial software as the N900 had (a handful). It was an "open source heaven" and had the strongest and most active community of open source developers of all smartphones ever made, but commercially it just didn't exist.

It looks that Jolla has been working really hard on trying to combine both worlds (as much openness as possible while also addressing the commercial stuff required for the phone to become a main stream product): they got rid of Harmattan's Aegis, they will not use any kind of DRM.... so the device will actually be MUCH MORE OPEN than the N9/N950. They are planning to use *JUST* an optional copy protection library... But for those people apparently even just that is too much.

Jolla's Jonni confirmed twice on the mailinglist that root access will NOT be in any way affected. Check those people's posts... everyone ignored it and just kept saying that it will certainly restrict access and "leak secure information". So they seem to "know better" than Jolla itself.

And everyone kept saying that such a protection isn't needed because.... "if someone wants to break it then he will break it anyway". I tried asking several times why such persons have locks in their home or garage doors, if the locks can also be broken if one only wants to break in. No one answered.

I also tried asking why everyone suspects that the copy-protection library (that doesn't even exist yet) will be source of a leak of confidential information, while there are several other protections in the system to keep confidential information secure, and actually ANY of them may leak some data or get hacked, not necessarily the copy-protection library. For example, I wanted to know if Android permission control will work properly (rather than automatically granting all permissions like on BB10 after 10.2 update, which is the worst security threat I can think of, as every sideloaded Android app can autostart, make phone calls, send messages, access contacts - without ever asking me for permission) - no one answered.

I kind of feel like a black sheep on that list. Just like I felt on Maemo.org - among the same people. Maybe things would start looking better if some NEW developers joined the list and their opinions somehow counterbalanced those of the 'good old company', but so far I haven't noticed anyone new there.
Back to top
Ketilk
Site supporter
Site supporter

Please add your avatar!

Joined: 19 Dec 2011

Posts: 508

Thanks received:
50 in 45 posts
Thanks given: 6


Phone: Jolla, N9 , N900, N97-mini

PostPosted: Tuesday, 12.Nov.2013 03:49    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

Quote:

- at compile time, the developer includes the copy-protection library and e.g. a passphrase for that application. Certain (required to work) parts of the application get encrypted or in some other way hashed to disallow easy removal of copy protection. The passphrase is then entered in the store to be used for the activation for each specific IMEI/device ID.

Just before it starts the qt-runtime it can check whether it's permitted to do so or not. That wouldn't be too bad and is hard enough to crack that you need to know how to do remove instructions from the binary.

One solution to prevent piracy would be including a secret code that Jolla(and only jolla) can connect with the jolla account used to buy it. If you find a pirated copy, just sent it to Jolla and they can figure out who it was. I think that would be okay, but guess that's something some of the mailing list people are afraid of.

I get less scared by the way you describe it, not sure if that's the only way to interpret it though.

BTW: I see that your posts is not listed as replies even when you reply to someone, makes following the conversation a bit harder. Probably your mail client does not cope well with mailman-mailinglists.
Back to top
Michal Jerz
Admin/Founder/Owner
Admin/Founder/Owner



Joined: 01 Sep 1999

Posts: 29366

Thanks received:
1088 in 693 posts
Thanks given: 285

Location: Poland
Phone: Jolla, BB Z10, BB Passport, N950, N900, N8, Nexus 4 (Ubuntu Touch), Lumia 920

PostPosted: Tuesday, 12.Nov.2013 07:22    Post subject:   Reply with quote   

A very good idea as well.

Anyway, these days technology is so advanced and computers so fast that almost everything can be done automatically and almost in 'real time'. I can even imagine the store PACKAGING each application into a new .rpm automatically upon purchase and including in the .rpm an encrypted activation file specific for a given IMEI / device ID, so that a separate activation process wouldn't be needed... The customer could even download the .rpm as a standalone file for easily backup, and it would contain the required activation in it, so it would never require connecting the store again for activation should one need to reinstall it. And if someone else attempted to install that file it wouldn't work (as the IMEI wouldn't match the one in the encrypted activation file) and additionally it would notify the Jolla store about it and send to Jolla the IMEI number / device ID of the unauthorized device...

So there is a MULTITUDE of possible implementations... Let's see how Jolla decides to make it.

Quote:

I see that your posts is not listed as replies even when you reply to someone, makes following the conversation a bit harder. Probably your mail client does not cope well with mailman-mailinglists.

That's because on that day I was using a web-based email client as I didn't have any email client installed on the computer I was using on that day. In the future I'll use a normal, local email client.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    My-Symbian ~ My-Maemo ~ My-MeeGo Forum Index -> Jolla Sailfish OS All times are GMT + 2 Hours

Go to page
1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
View previous topic :: View next topic

Similar Topics on this forum
Topic Author Forum Replies Posted
No new posts Spam from Jolla Michal Jerz Jolla Sailfish OS 6 Wednesday, 28.Jun.2017 03:15 View latest post
No new posts Jolla in 2017 BentL Jolla Sailfish OS 4 Wednesday, 08.Feb.2017 17:43 View latest post
No new posts Jolla secures new financing for Sailfish OS development BentL Jolla Sailfish OS 1 Tuesday, 03.May.2016 11:17 View latest post
No new posts Jolla Adventures Kleuter Jolla Sailfish OS 0 Friday, 13.Nov.2015 19:30 View latest post
No new posts First wave of Jolla tablets arrive, further delay for rest Casanunda Jolla Sailfish OS 13 Friday, 09.Oct.2015 17:23 View latest post
No new posts What is Jolla up to? MeowTseDong Jolla Sailfish OS 5 Friday, 21.Aug.2015 21:48 View latest post
No new posts Jolla splitting into two companies and changing management N/A Jolla Sailfish OS 69 Wednesday, 08.Jul.2015 09:36 View latest post
No new posts What are those partnerships of Jolla in fact? Kleuter Jolla Sailfish OS 35 Saturday, 25.Apr.2015 13:55 View latest post
No new posts Sailfish OS 2.0 & Jolla Tablet on MWC Casanunda Jolla Sailfish OS 15 Tuesday, 03.Mar.2015 23:11 View latest post
No new posts The blog from Marc Dillon about the Jolla plans for 2015 spyder81 Jolla Sailfish OS 10 Monday, 26.Jan.2015 15:55 View latest post

Posting/discussing/exchanging warez/cracks/serial numbers/links to web sites offering such resources and/or any other illegal content
is FORBIDDEN on this forum and results in an immediate BAN.


Symbian and all Symbian-based marks and logos are trade marks of Symbian Software Limited.
This website is not in any way endorsed or supported by Symbian Software Limited.    (C) 2001 My-Symbian.com All Rights Reserved