What I was trying to tell you with my original reply to you is that Jolla chose a different point on the free/pramatic curve of available SoCs. They selected a phone that's more likely to be used by average people rather than a fully open one. (You can still see in this very thread, complains about the high price for what it offers, showing they haven't fully succeeded, at that.)

Pointing out that they still rely on Android drivers for booting the thing is a little tone-deaf from my perspective when they're basically choosing a different path towards a similar goal to Purism and other alternative mobile vendors: higher availability of non Google, non Apple mobile devices. Perfect is the enemy of good and all that. And like I explained the reason for their choice is not nefarious but a pragmatic one.

And what I was trying to tell you is that they're free to choose whatever point on the curve they want and pursue that as long as they don't misrepresent what they're doing. What is "full-stack alternative" supposed to mean when it relies on the very thing it's supposed to be an alternative to? What is Purism's effort then, "even fuller-stack alternative"? Words have meanings.