Fairphone announces the €599 Fairphone 6, with a 6.31" 120Hz LTPO OLED display, a Snapdragon 7s Gen 3 chip, and enhanced modularity with 12 swappable parts
-
I didn't know sony made phones
They've always made phones...
-
Maybe you could start a competitor that produces a similar spec phone for $100?
Obviously not, the poor spec choices led to the price. Perhaps the company claiming to focus on ethics could focus on ethics instead of bezel-less design and 120 Hz screens, thus bringing it in at a lower price point. Feel free to critique me now
-
They've always made phones...
Not in the US apparently
-
how many times does the average person use wireless charging? Seriously, I haven't seen anyone do that yet, or know of someone who uses that.
and yet that's still a major feature in lots of phones
wrote last edited by [email protected]If I've asked a question twice and you've danced around it both times, that tells everyone what your answer is.
-
love fairphone but i cant go bacl from graphene os. its so nice not having google attacjed to everything.
If you want something not Google, I used to have Ubuntu Touch on a Fairphone before Australia's 3G network was switched off. It would have to be an older Fairphone however.
-
You are completely and utterly wrong. I'm pretty sure that a $700 phone's dac is better than what you can find on a $5 dongle from god knows where. Also, by design there should be no "noise" or "interference" causing issues with the internal dac. If there is, you bought an extremely shitty device.
You know you've got not argument when you have to compare a $700 dollar phone to a $5 dongle for your argument to even make sense.
First of all, I seriously doubt any $700 phone without a 3.5mm port is going to have a decent DAC, because there's no reason for it. In those phones the DAC is used primarily for phone calls. If those phones had a a 3.5mm port and they were flagship phones then maybe they would have higher quality DACs in them, but then they'd also cost more. And secondly, I wasn't talking about some cheap $5 dongle, I specifically said quality headphones.
-
No consumer decided it would be better without it, there's literally no reason to defend it's removal. It doesn't exist because the phone companies wanted to sell their wireless earbuds, that's it. Anything else they tell you is bullshit.
Why are you trying to justify not having it? You can still use your wireless buds if you want if the port exists, you can still use your USB-C earphones or adapter if you'd like. It can exist in harmony along with other features, like it did for decades before capitalism called for more profits.
Why aren't you complaining about the removal of a keyboard? Or the removal of SD card slots? Or the removal or the IR light? Or the notification light? or something else that used to be there but isn't now. Why is the 3.5mm port so special it deserves constant complaining about almost A DECADE LATER? Why must you be these grumpy old men who can't fucking move on with the times.
I don't really care if the port is there or not, I'm just fed up with the constant whining about it. It's gone, the ship has sailed. The majority are more than happy to use wireless headphones, 3.5mm is a niche in the mobile space. There are alternatives if you really like wired headphones. What makes 3.5mm such fucking hill to die on? Nothing. It's just petty conservatism of people unwilling to move on with the times.
-
You're vastly overestimating the space required for a 3.5mm jack, and the reasons for its removal.
The jack takes up some internal space, but not much at all. The components required internally like the DAC chip are insignificant. It is a potential source of water ingress, but that can be mitigated and has been done many times before.
The reason for removal is two fold, first you simply don't have to deal with any of the above, so from an engineering perspective it's always easier to not do something. The second, and most important, **is to sell wireless headphones. **
You'll notice that Fairphone came out with their own earbuds at the same time they removed the headphone jack. You could of course use Bluetooth headphones with the Fairphone 1, 2, and 3, but you weren't forced to think about it and could just use your existing headphones. Removing the jack ads inconvenience and breaks user habit, causing people to re-evaluate their headphones and consider a new purchase, which the manufacturer just happens to have and likely in a bundle deal.
Apple, Google, and Samsung have seen huge uplift in earbud sales with the removal of the jack. So the anger of some power users is of no consequence to them. Seeing Fairphone follow in this behaviour what's disappointing.
I made the mistake of believing that Fairphone is an enthusiast company, like the Framework of phones maybe. There is some overlap, sure, with the repair-ability aspect and available parts and schematics, but that's about it.
Other than that, FP wants to be a mainstream brand, the eco-friendly Samsung or Apple; the power users can get shafted with their audio jacks for all they care. While Framework has actual hardware modularity and release updated HW modules so you don't buy the whole device again for an upgrade.
Looking at FP's financial statements, I get the impression they aren't doing too hot lately, so I get it if they need bigger margins to continue operating. Just don't be a fucking hypocrite and lie about the reason of the jack removal ffs.
-
What about headphones with a replaceable cable? Higher quality cables usually last longer aswell
Yeah, my current bluetooth headset has that option, and i keep a cable in reserve. the ones i had to replace were mostly in my teens/tweens, and were still cabled in-ear style - easier to hide under clothes and hair, but also no cable replacing if you don't know much about how to solder. TBH, if i had to decide i would not go back to cabled headphones at all - it's simply too limiting and irritating to deal with, especially with multiple audio sources. When listening to music the latency is not important (and has improved a lot in comparison to the humble start), and it's been a while since i had phones which had sound quality issues because of bluetooth.
-
This is thing with not understanding how statistics work. The point is that your personal experience is biased.
These people are not passionate about phone thickness. They won't start or even have conversations about it. Specially since, for the most part, the companies are already catering to their tastes. But, if placed in front of a survey and asked to rank phone features by their importance for their purchase decisions, the overwhelming majority will rank other phones features way above a headphone jack. Most people on the planet are not audiophiles, and the majority of people perceive wires as an annoyance and an inconvenience.
That is the point of surveying and market research. To check with the actual potential buyers what is worth making. Of course it isn't a guarantee, looking here at the recent flop of the Samsung Edge. But otherwise, a single person's perception of the market will never be complete or accurate.
Are we forgetting that companies also have their own bias to make the decisions that increase overall profits? They lost buyers (me included) by this change, but they made up the difference by selling higher margin accessories. Companies will only cater to users if it aligns with turning a bigger profit. If adding an anti-feature is better for the bottom line, then that's how it goes. Enshittification doesn't happen accidentally, but by pushing the boundaries of what the users tolerate.
-
headphone jackn't
This this this.
They want to sell their buds and headset.
don't misunderstand me, those are great repairable bluetooth devices, but if i were to not have a headphone jack and just a "long lasting repairable phone" , i'm sticking to my Google pixel.
-
"just", I think not giving money to Apple or Google anything is a perfectly good reason alone to want expandable storage.
Phone manufacturers charge a massive premium for more storage on a phone, storage which is then lost if the phone dies. A microSD card can be moved around and they cost little.
Not everyone has a home server, in fact a very very small percentage do and being able to store their photos and what-not on a microSD card is very valuable. The freedom to add more storage is a good thing to have. Most people can understand an SD card, but not how to setup an entire home server with syncing etc, let alone exposing that to the web to access it anywhere. It also costs money to run, a microSD card doesn't.
The only reason we don't have expandable storage or a 3.5mm port anymore is: money. They want to sell you that cloud service, upcharge you for more internal storage and make you buy their bluetooth earbuds.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I understand all of that and I agree with you. Not wanting to pay monthly storage fees is perfectly reasonable too. I know I did everything to avoid giving Google any money for storage.
But microSD slots on phones aren't coming back, and manufacturers are giving you 512GB of internal storage at most, so we need to move on with the times.
I don't have a home server (yet) either, but I do have 2 TB disks I use to store all the important stuff I want to save forever. Nothing lives on my phone so I'm fine with 128GB.
Local syncing can be done just by installing Syncthing or Omnisend, and everything gets transferred through your home Wi-Fi. No need for complicated setups. I mentioned home servers as an example but you certainly don't need one.
MicroSD cards also die so I don't know why you used that as a slight against internal phone storage. You should always have backups.
Storage is dirt cheap these days, it makes no sense to hinder yourself buying niche phones, often at inflated prices, just for a feature that is easily worked around. In my opinion.
-
This this this.
They want to sell their buds and headset.
don't misunderstand me, those are great repairable bluetooth devices, but if i were to not have a headphone jack and just a "long lasting repairable phone" , i'm sticking to my Google pixel.
They want to sell their buds and headset.
Not sure if it still is that way, but when i bought my FP4 years ago, free buds were included.
-
love fairphone but i cant go bacl from graphene os. its so nice not having google attacjed to everything.
I wish I could ditch stock android but my business bank app refuses to run on e/os and I assume I'd have the same problem with graphene.
e/os was otherwise soo much better, and the increase in performance and battery life was huge.
-
And with the same ethics standards
how many people care about the source of the materials?
-
Why aren't you complaining about the removal of a keyboard? Or the removal of SD card slots? Or the removal or the IR light? Or the notification light? or something else that used to be there but isn't now. Why is the 3.5mm port so special it deserves constant complaining about almost A DECADE LATER? Why must you be these grumpy old men who can't fucking move on with the times.
I don't really care if the port is there or not, I'm just fed up with the constant whining about it. It's gone, the ship has sailed. The majority are more than happy to use wireless headphones, 3.5mm is a niche in the mobile space. There are alternatives if you really like wired headphones. What makes 3.5mm such fucking hill to die on? Nothing. It's just petty conservatism of people unwilling to move on with the times.
the 3.5mm jack still exists on low to mid-range phones, the high end ones were the only ones that removed it and then mid-range phones copied it.
-
I think you need a camera, not a phone
Maybe phones shouldn't have multiple cameras if they aren't actually usable
-
No one has been using aux cable mobile headphones for the past 10 years. Headphone jack is e-waste at this point. bluetooth audio is great and if you really want to be a boomer you can use the usb C headphones.
how else are you supposed to connect it to cars that weren't made yesterday?
-
USB 2? What a stupid choice that appears to be. Did they have any reasoning behind that?
wrote last edited by [email protected]The transfer speed over USB on mine probably doesn't even pass USB 2 speeds anyway and I've had flagship phones in the past that were even slower over a cable. I guess if that's still the case then there's probably a good engineering argument to reduce complexity.
-
Maybe phones shouldn't have multiple cameras if they aren't actually usable
Maybe you shouldn't buy a phone if you want a "usable" camera.
And you shouldn't buy a camera either as you don't seem to understand those either.
