I can’t believe some of the points Linus made against the Fairphone, especially given he’s onboard with the same compromises for the Framework laptop. 🤭

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think their point about framework laptops is actually a stupid one. The fairphone is not a modular device (although they always seem to be trying to claim that), which the framework laptops are. The fact you have to remove the battery to do anything kind of proves that it’s not modular, we’ve seen modular phones so we know what they look like and they don’t look like this.

      So it just seems a weird comparison to have made. The fairphone is easier to repair than your average smartphone, but it’s still a lot less repairable than phones from the early 2000s. It’s not a simple repair unless you’re talking about a battery replacement. It doesn’t have swappable buttons, It doesn’t have swappable chassis. Basically it’s a cheap Android phone that costs more money than it is really worth with the justification of environmentalism. I would take a truly modular and easy to repair phone over this any day of the week if one existed, and since one doesn’t yeah I think i’ll go for a Pixel.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The original framework didn’t have motherboard upgrades, those came later. It was lauded for its openness and repairability

          The original framework came with the claim that it WOULD have motherboard upgrades though (and then they delivered). It was only highly praised for what it was at the time because that’s what the product was (on top of being a product with pretty good specs) and you should never buy a product on the promise of something else.

          Unfortunately, the modular phones died, because the few phones that did offer modules completely failed. It’s just not viable to create a fully modular device in this form factor.

          I mean lots of people said that about laptops too and then Framework shook things up.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m not going to get into it because it’s really not relevant to the point, but it is absolutely not proven that modular phones are non-viable. The only two phones to ever tryid it basically never even were given a chance by their manufacturers before they were killed. They just realized that they would never make lots of money on it because you make more money by selling a new phone, then you ever will by just making modular components.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The fact you have to remove the battery to do anything kind of proves that it’s not modular,

        Why?

        Especially when you seem to suggest that it’s an easy thing to remove…

        It’s not a simple repair unless you’re talking about a battery replacement.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      but half the battery life in video decode means charging your phone twice as often even if you don’t watch Youtube all day

      Most of the power goes into the screen. The Pixel 8 has a ridiculously power efficient screen. I have one. It also costs $300 to replace. The Fairphone’s is $100.

      other phones have sliders or slots that will let you live swap either card without even taking the back off

      Slots and sliders inevitably weaken the phone frame making it easier to break. They also cost more to machine.

      even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone.

      Replacing a battery to rescue a Pixel will run you $100-200.

      Many design choices make a lot of sense when looked through the repairability, durability and cost of repairability lenses.

    • pop@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      For a customer who wants the best phone for their money, the Fairphone is objectively worse

      Objectivity worse in performance, sure. Some people consider more things than just being a fastest bang for the buck. Unethical mining, forced labour, e-waste, data mining, and lots of other things. If you care at all, that is.

      If you want to compare that to a product made by a billion dollar company, no one is stopping anyone. There is cost associated with doing things ethically. Small companies aren’t financed to eat those costs to gain the market. It speaks more about principles than anything else.

      I don’t disagree with Linus’ suggestion at the end: even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone

      is it? The person who sold the phone is most definitely going to buy a new phone and if they sold the phone released last year they will most likely do so every year. The reason there’s a second hand market with a year old phones is because people obsessively buy new phones. How exactly is that environmentally friendly than starting to use a phone made by a company with higher ethics? Surely the later stacks higher in being environmentally and morally friendly?

      Duchebag is spouting capitalists “trickle down” economics. Rather than fix the cause, find the flex tape to hide it. Rich people buy new phones, less rich buy phones from the rich, and so on. No one needs to look past the marketing into ethics in how they were made and companies keep profiting in billions by exploitation of the poor. So so environmentally friendly.

      • accideath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        People are going to buy new phones regardless. You not buying used phones is not going to change that.

        Buying used or refurbished keeps the devices they‘d throw away (or keep in a drawer for 10 years, then throw away), if they couldn’t sell them, from landfills.

        Also, I know plenty of people who are well off that buy second hand phones and even more people who couldn’t even afford a Fairphone (which starts at almost 500€ for a 4 and 650€ for a 5) that buy a brand new 200-300€ phone every two years.

        And those low end phones are the least environmentally friendly because they‘re definitely unethically made they most likely break more quickly than higher end options, they usually don’t get updates for very long, if at all, and there’s no noteworthy second hand market for them because people just throw them away (or into a drawer) if the phone stops working or when they feel like getting a new one, because who buys a 2 year old low end phone second hand?

        Buying used instead is a great option. You get a higher end device for cheaper without anything new having to be made for you. It‘ll still last you years and you’ll have a better experience than with a cheap new phone.

        Yes, it would be better if all phones were ethically produced, easy to repair and would last a long time. Especially if there are ethically phones in the sub 300€ market. Won’t be easy to achieve, if at all, and wouldn’t stop blind consumerism but it would make for an even better second hand market. Because, you know what’s better than a fairphone? A second hand fairphone.

      • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s the stupidest argument against 2nd hand market I’ve ever heard. It read as you’re too proud and too much nose on your imagined status to buy “used shit”

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        How exactly is that environmentally friendly than starting to use a phone made by a company with higher ethics? Surely the later stacks higher in being environmentally and morally friendly?

        The difference is you can produce only the best phones. There aren’t throw away/cheap phones. The only difference is then how old the phone is.

        It’s the difference between buying an old Lexus and a new base model Kia. They both might cost the same, and yeah the Lexus driver almost definitely got a new car, but the Lexus is probably going to outlive the Kia.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      also the fairphone doesnt sell replacement parts for any longer than most regular manufacturers do.

      at least the framework offers pretty good modularity.

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think Framework and Fairphone are solving similar but different problems.

      Fairphone is “keep this phone as configured working.”

      Framework is more “I have this laptop but it can become this other newer laptop without me needing to buy all the parts again AND I can buy replacement parts.”

      It’s really not even remotely the same calculus in my book.

    • ElTacoEsMiPastor@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Thanks for the nuanced response. Obviously both FP and LTT are defending their own interests and neither are inherently better.

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Chiming in on the SIM/SD: as far as I can remember, my phone didn’t let me hotswap neither SIM or SD, always required a restart to handle it properly.

        • sierraoscar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes of course. The point of this phone is to trade cost/perf/etc for improved repairability and business ethics. Long software support is a prerequisite for repairability being useful.

          This phone isn’t for people looking primarily for best value.

      • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Most common middle- and upper-tier phones, as well as any Pixel and Fairphone (thanks to being more open) will get a custom ROM with updates 8+ years after the release, and you can buy a used 5-year-old phone quite cheaply.

        Typing this on my 10-year-old Sony Xperia Z with Android 13. It cost me $0 (found in e-waste) including a data plan (owner forgot SIM inside). The camera has low sensitivity and dust in it and the battery is worn, but everything else is decent. I will open it some day to fix the problems, a replacement battery cost me $10. There is even 4G and NFC, and the 1080x1920 screen is nearly “retina-density” at such small size. I decided to not use the SIM as it could be criminal, and I have my prepaid one in s dumb phone, but I use it for entertainment - the phone fits in my hand and the design is quite timeless. The CPU is a little weak, it cannot decode 1080p30 or 720p60 video in real time, and gets hot quickly on demanding websites.

        • sierraoscar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Most people aren’t comfortable with flashing unofficial ROMs onto garbage bin phones. I’m unironically glad that you have rescued a perfectly good phone but that’s just not a scalable solution IMO. Buying a used phone that you know has a lineage ROM is a more viable path but you’re still back to square one if the battery or port or screen give up on you.

    • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      You’re making a lot of good points here, but I feel like this last bit goes against how most people would evaluate purchasing such a phone after the fact.

      For a customer who wants the best phone for their money, the Fairphone is objectively worse. It’s marketed at the niche segment of people who are willing to spend extra for a mid-tier phone to get more environmentally and socially conscious hardware. (…) Most people will be incredibly unhappy with a Fairphone 5 if the alternative would’ve been a Pixel 8.

      People don’t walk around comparing what they have to what they don’t have based on specifications alone (that’s just successful marketing). Their actual experiences are what matters. The FP is a good enough phone that most people will experience no issues having one. Most people simply don’t need the best of the best, and whether it’s a FP or a Pixel doing what they need their phones to do is of very little consequence to them.

      Don’t get me wrong. If you’re price oriented, and you want to get the most bang for the buck, there’s better options. But I would argue that this doesn’t matter all that much for most people’s satisfaction, which is probably much more by affected long support and repairability (even if it’s just that you can swap the battery).

        • verysoft@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Most average phone users don’t give a shit about bezels, weight and stuff, they just buy whatever is put in front of them. If Apple came out with a new iPhone that was heavier, thicker bezelled, slower, people would still buy it because the truth is, they don’t compare anything or look into it besides “this is the latest”.

          Speed is such a none issue, all mid-range phones are plenty fast enough for the very large majority of people. Buying flagship phones with the fastest SoCs is pointless to them, they will never get value from it - they just buy them because they are the latest “best shit you need” and they cost a lot more than a Fairphone.

          Now the value of replacing a battery on the fly (whether broken or just for more juice) would actually be a lot higher, people used to do that in the past. The ability to repair the phone yourself wouldn’t really matter to most, as they usually just take their phones to a repair shop anyway, but the cost of the repair would be lower.

          The Fairphone has a great mission, one that all phones should be going after. They are expensive for what you are getting in terms of specifications, yes, but the company isn’t large enough to make them any cheaper without sacrificing the point of them in the first place. It’s fine to not want one, but comparing them to flagship phones, the same way you would compare an S24 to an iPhone 15, is actually unfair. Not to say you can’t critise it, I think the software is the weak point and some issues were clearly highlighted, not unfixable though.

          If price wasn’t a factor and you just handed them to average people to use, then they would most likely be satisfied and would find value in it.

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      but other phones have sliders or slots that will let you live swap either card without even taking the back off

      Modern phones on purpose dropped SD card support but yeah, slimmer phones still have those sliders. To be fair you need a tool for that, unlike their option.

      especially for a company that small

      We really have to keep that in mind. When they planned the FP5 they likely had no idea Google would do the same. They take what Qualcomm offers, unlike tech Giants Google and Samsung that can basically dictate update lifespans.

      relatively spotty history when it comes to patching

      They are the ODM unlike GrapheneOS and comparing them to Google is really unfair. Google makes Android, so they know the code best. They patch very quickly, the updates work for their phones out of the box, less work for GrapheneOS.

      Fairphone on the other hand has to maintain a unique device which is way more work, they get early access because of that though.

      And their noncompliance with all the GrapheneOS security demands is the reason I dont use it.

      seems to take issue with seem to be the LineageOS/Android defaults

      Fairphone is Google certified and thus needs to ship unmodified Android including all the Google crap. There is a company called Murena that creates some hacky LineageOS-based OS and sells Fairphones with it preinstalled.

      This /e/OS looks nice and has very nice integrations, but is fundamentally flawed and less secure than GrapheneOS for example (microG, depending on unmaintained apps, even slower updates,…)

      even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone.

      Regular phones dont get 8 years of updates so they will be outdated and should not be used. This argument makes no sense.

      I got a used Pixel 6a with 2 years left, so used but way less long updates, so I hope on getting a used Pixel 8 which means roughly 1,7 phones instead of one, should be equally sustainable.

    • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      “It’s better than the Fairphone 4” doesn’t really matter when I’m comparing the Fairphone to a Pixel phone.

      What, why?