A user configurable “hardware” privacy switch is a contradiction in itself. If it can be controlled by software it can’t do what the marketing claims 🤦

One reason to have hardware switches is because the manufacturer doesn’t want malware that has compromised the OS to be able to bypass it, and from this standpoint — which is a very legitimate position — then that’s very much a real objection.

But another reason is because people don’t want to rely on using an app on a touchscreen, but to have a convenient way to twiddle the thing without dicking around with the touchscreen, similar to why people complain about some modern cars lacking physical controls. Lets you flip it off in your pocket or whatnot. From that standpoint, it might be a reasonable design. That is, there it isn’t “I’m worried about the OS being compromised”, but “I just want a convenient way to kill access to software running at an application level to various sources of data”.

I do think that it’s important to make sure that consumers are not misled as to what guarantees the physical switch provides, though.

I agree that the limitations should be stated more clearly, but even a software configurable switch is desirable. In some apps, the button to turn on the camera is a bit too easy to accidently press for my liking. If someone calls and I’m in my pj’s I don’t want to accidently enable video.

A step in the right direction is never enough, eh?

Maybe. From what I’ve seen the UI looks pretty good and they advertise good Android app integration. The previous Jolla phone is very old and officially supported Sony phones are a mixed bag according to the forums. This could at least focus efforts again on a modern platform