Fairphone 4 has a five-year warranty and aims for six years of updates
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
And I'm not a difficult customer here: I didn't mind paying twice the price, or software issues in their custom Android version. I'm only moderately annoyed having a proximity sensor that keeps keeps needing a reset, a phone that keeps rebooting for no reasons or a pretty bad power management (going from 15% to no-battery in less than a minute). They are a small company and have limited manpower, I can totally understand that.
What I'm really pissed off it them not fulfilling their promises. They sold me a modular phone, with the promise of hardware upgrades and maintenance. They sold me a “PC”-like smartphone, where there's no frequent release of new models but a continuously upgrade-able phone. But they didn't even try to deliver, and they didn't apologize.
[1]: in 2016, and I'm still using it btw, even if it's far from good at this point, because it “works” and I'm still pretty conscious about the environmental impact of smartphones.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170610122224/https://shop.fair...
I ordered mine in March or April 2016 and received it in May or June the same year, right before going on a 5 months bike-trip so I'm certain I'm mixing dates up.
What rules are there at the moment on planned obsolescence? I don't think there are any to change?
Also quietly amused by the hypocrisy of your comment.
The top voted comments criticizing them all have clearly valid claims. it does not matter if the "ethical" product is good if the company behind them isn't ethical.
I'm making the position that cutting off your nose to spite your face isn't productive.
I think I can provide an explanation for their increasing popularity: people have figured out that it gives a cheap boost to the "legitimacy" of their comment without adding any actual substance, partially because it stirs a feeling of guilt and wanting to "be better" (either than the rest of HN, or as an individual).
Needless to say, it's just another form of emotional manipulation that doesn't add anything to the discussion.
The guidelines already discourage this kind of thing: "Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community."[1]
It seems to me that you're arguing the only way to not demand ideological purity is by demanding that the only factor that should be considered is end user experience.
Which, ironically, is demanding far more ideological purity than the person you replied to is.
If a company, even one that is disliked, does something good - then that effort should be congratulated. That's how you change an industry - to treat such as pariahs merely proves that such efforts are not compelling to users and hinders progress.
Also the author (and most of HN) seemingly forgets that wired headphone options exist for the USB-C port.
The headphone jack is a signal. When Apple removed it people like me pledged to never support such a customer hostile move. Google's flip flop on that issue just made this conviction stronger. To remove that port is simply unacceptable, especially in a product aimed at minimizing waste.
I wonder whether this position is rare, or if FP just does not know its customer base.
They are not a regular company that needs to do such moves, and besides: The Framework laptop shows that there usually is a way, despite what companies say.
There's no chance that this is true. They're buying the same components from the same suppliers, and they're laughably small compared to Google, nevermind Apple or Samsung.
https://www.fairphone.com/en/2021/02/08/fair-mining/
I've seen some videos of ASM lithium mines, stuff is nightmare inducing. The videographers spotted a handful of children in the hills trying not to be seen.
I think it's doable, it'd be similar to setting up and auditing your own green coffee beans; it wouldn't be particularly capital intensive.
"We are working with our battery supplier to integrate lithium from IRMA-assessed mines into our battery supply chain" this line could mean anything from actually doing something to "we sent one email". Before you believe that someone is making a difference, be sure they are. Fp is not.
Edit: The main reason to be wary of "fair" brands is that they put extremely huge markups and motivate that by paying a tiny bit more for their parts, making them really profitable. You'd need to show people that it is better to pay for a fairphone and that they actually deliver on their promises, over paying for a cheap phone and donating the difference to a good cause.
Next next phone I bought still works today, mich longer than the 1.5 Fairphones I had bought before.
Whats sad about that experience, is that it made me sceptical. I now need to wait for the new model to prove reliable in reviews before I'd buy it, but by that time the mid-tier hardware would be completely outdated alteady. In essence it'll take years for them to gain my trust back.
Still i hope that products like this or the framework laptop take off.
Which is to say: sure I'm disappointed, but it's also part of the risk when buying a company's second phone, and the first they designed themselves. When the issues with my 2 become too much, it looks like I'll be getting a Fairphone 4.
But first let's see how long I can make this one last.
I bought an FP3 earlier in the year and it's been very decent so far.
But I'm extremely disappointed by the lack of the headphone jack in this new one, and I think I'm going to go write an angry e-mail to them now.
4 months after the initial blip, laptop is still dead, there is talk about a replacement but they will get back to me in 48h. It's been 2 weeks.
If dell does that, I guess we can forgive a noob player like ff.
There's a strong sense in the community that the company were really just finding their manufacturing feet with the first two models, with the 3rd being the first very stable long-term-reliable one that they got right.
The only broad criticism I have heard of FP3 is the specs being slightly on the low end, and it looks like they're attempting to at least partially address that with FP4.
But FP3 at least seems broadly very reliable.
Especially the audio jack is a hard sell when their mission statement is sustainability.
wired headphones can literally last decades
> A notable downside compared to previous Fairphones is that the Fairphone 4 no longer includes a 3.5mm headphone jack, a choice that feels at odds with the company’s otherwise customer-first approach. Fairphone tells me it made this decision in order to be able to offer an official IP rating for dust and water resistance, which was missing from the company’s previous phones. It’s only IP54, which means it’s protected from light splashes rather than full submersion, but that’s impressive in light of its removable rear cover and modular design.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/30/22700014/fairphone-4-rele...
Yeah, especially when they have a blurb on their preorder page about how they don't include earphones with the phone "for sustainability, so that you can re-use the ones you already have".
That's going to be difficult if I can't plug them in, no? I think your marketing team just accidentally that entire premise.
Every wired headphones I've had started to break down after a year or so, including ones with a detachable cable.
BT headphones are much more reliable. If you buy something like the Sony's you can probably get replacement batteries.
Granted, they were never attached to a mobile device, which wears the cable.
Generally speaking, you'll probably have more success with active (DAC-based) USB-C to 3.5mm adapters.
to be fair, I believe that was an actual DAC in the dongle. I suppose in theory you might get better quality with analog passthrough from an onboard DAC. I doubt anyone other than apple would bother putting a decent DAC in a phone with no headphone jack though.
To counter your anecdotal evidence, let me offer mine.
My AKGs are almost 20 years old now. I only had to relpace the plug once which was a cheap repair I could do myself.
> A notable downside compared to previous Fairphones is that the Fairphone 4 no longer includes a 3.5mm headphone jack, a choice that feels at odds with the company’s otherwise customer-first approach. Fairphone tells me it made this decision in order to be able to offer an official IP rating for dust and water resistance, which was missing from the company’s previous phones. It’s only IP54, which means it’s protected from light splashes rather than full submersion, but that’s impressive in light of its removable rear cover and modular design.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/30/22700014/fairphone-4-rele...
It's probably not as repairable as the the fairphone, but clearly it's possible to be waterproof with a removable back/battery and a jack.
Replacing cracked glass was hard as you had to soften glue and required a uv curing glue to attach the replacement, but would assume the fairphone treats the digitizer screen and front glass as a single replacement assembly also.
> that’s impressive in light of its removable rear cover and modular design.
(In the live stream they also mentioned that a headphone jack would make the phone bigger still. And also that they had a lot of back-and-forth on it - I don't know why you would attribute this to malice rather than a balancing of constraints.)
Because you are not listening that it is only about the 3.5mm jack. If they can do a USB-C port, they can do a 3.5mm jack. A USB-C is quite a bit more difficult to deal with than a 3.5mm jack.
> but Fairphone has the rating while being user-repairable. Not being glued shut is what makes it more challenging to get that rating, as I understand it.
What does that have to do with dropping the 3.5mm jack? There are other holes which present the same problem as the 3.5mm jack.
> (In the live stream they also mentioned that a headphone jack would make the phone bigger still.
Making the phone bigger would give them space to add seals to keep stuff out. See, nothing to do with the IP rating.
> I don't know why you would attribute this to malice rather than a balancing of constraints.)
Attributing it to "reasons other than IP rating" is not attributing it to malice. It was pretty clear it was more about making it thinner like every other phone and not IP rating.
I imagine (but know little to nothing about these ratings) that the more holes and crevices there are, the harder it is to be water and dust resistant. Modularity and the USB port add these, the jack might have pushed it over the limit, and when forced to choose between those three, the jack seems to me to be the sensible one to sacrifice. Still a shame, of course.
"The most fair-trade and repairable phone you can't plug headphones into" isn't the nicest selling point.
I now only buy headphones with replaceable cables to avoid this problem
I have two pairs of 15y sennheiser that are pristine and used all the time. And they seamlessly plug into any audio device I own or my friends do, are never out of charge, and I can listen with two headphones from one tablet when wife and I watch a movie on airplane or tent with kids.
Bluetooth will sooner or later loose battery - never mind the lag of 15y old Bluetooth standard.
You say you can "probably" get replacement batteries but we've already seen that it's damn near impossible to source the tiny batteries for things like true wireless earbuds.
Really? They seem to have less points of failure to me - they're fully encapsulated (usually glued shut) and don't have to physically interface with anything less than simple metal charging pads. Compared to physically being shoved into something and yanked out and a cable that is being manipulated.
Points of failure on wired buds are the cord and connector construction and materials. So you can generally know the "more you spend", it's likely being put into the construction (for reputable brands).
This just means they're harder to repair? That's not a reduced point of failure in really any sense.
Wired headphones are some wires, solder, also often glue, and a driver. Wireless headphones have batteries, internal computers that need to communicate wirelessly with devices and - in the case of True Wireless Earbuds - themselves, and in general more parts that are more delicate crammed into the same or smaller space.
> don't have to physically interface with anything less than simple metal charging pads. Compared to physically being shoved into something and yanked out and a cable that is being manipulated.
What a strange point. Unless you're wirelessly charging some AirPods then... You're gonna have to charge those things with a physical cable. That will have to be, as you so hyperbolically put it, "shoved into something and yanked out."
Fortunately, any decent headphones worth your money anticipate such rude treatment and have their cables be easily replaceable.
Wireless headphones can't be said to do the same for their batteries that will inevitably wear out.
I don't think I've read many comments as airy as this one. You can't get replacement batteries.
I have a pair of bose wired earbuds from 2013 maybe that still look brand new and the quality blows me away. Literal plug and play.And the type of wire somehow never catches/jumbles/splits etc.
In thatsame time I've had at least 5 pairs of bluetooth buds and over ears 9that I can think of). sony, sennheiser, jabra, and some amazon brands.
The user experience is different for every one, random buttons, different time to sync, etc. Hundreds of dollars wasted, largely due to battery degradation or one of the buds straight up not working. There's no reason why batteries in bluetooth modules can't be consumer replaced besides planned obsolescence.
Also, for a less bulky design.
What would be very helpful, and consistent with the ethos of the Fairphone organization (or, at least, what I think it is) would be to provide actual repair data. "n% of devices have had to be replaced entirely, m% of devices have had a technical issues requiring a hardware fix, here's the number of repair requests made per phone generation", etc.
I like the idea of a Fairphone, but I don't want to buy a product that is going not do the thing that it's supposed to, but I also don't want to avoid buying a product that is generally reliable just because I read comments entirely from the users whose devices broke.
I know it is unprecedented . . . for a manufacturer to endorse releasing Android versions without chipset support. But, seriously, LineageOS does this all the time with their supported devices.
Instead of trying to make phones last longer I think recycling is the better option.
Tech must slow down in my opinion.
I had a pixel 3 and I swapped camera, microphones, usb c port. The iFixit kit needed for this costs a few bucks but that's it.
It is just having good instructions that matter, and parts. A fully waterproof high end Pixel device is not less "repairable" that a fairphone.
Are you saying that iFixit knows less about repairability than you? They seem to directly disagree with your statement that Pixel devices are not less "repariable" than a Fairphone.
You can check the scores here yourself: https://www.ifixit.com/smartphone-repairability
Edit: Going deeper, apparently France is running a Repairability index as well, you can check how Fairphone is doing against Pixel there too: https://www.indicereparabilite.fr/ (spoiler: Pixel gets 6.3 while Fairphone gets 8.7 [out of 10])
[1] https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Google+Pixel+3a+Battery+Replace...
Ideally I'd like open source, sustainable, ethical hardware along with an open source, user-controlled independent OS, but in today's world, 2 out of 4 ain't bad. And I can understand one company not wanting to spread their priorities too thinly trying to solve every problem at once.
Edit. confirmed it should be shipped with /e/Os as a choice. https://twitter.com/deivei/status/1443579458531692561
i would still like an alternative option that is a) user reparable b) can be updated on an open source/non corporate basis
That said I really like Fairphone and its principles, but I wonder why they never partnered with the Linux on phone community.
I'd like to move to a more sustainable phone (I smashed the screen of the OP8P in the first week) but I suspect my OP8P will still outperform the Fairphone 4 by the time a launch unit 5 year warranty is up?
https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-compare/qualcomm-snapdragon-86...
As for the price, dude, how can you even complain about that with a project like this, don't even mention it. I think it is wonderful. Less expensive than an iPhone 12 mini and it just feels so good + you can experiment with OSes.
However, there's no reason that the electricity has to come from fossil fuels. Aluminum refineries are an incredibly useful base load, able to turn up the heaters when energy is available and inexpensive, but to reduce the load when energy is less available and more expensive. This is highly compatible with renewable energy sources, providing a useful sink for excess capacity.
Aluminum production can and will continue well after fossil fuel energy sources are phased out, at which point it will have a lower environmental impact.
Also, aluminum is extremely easy and cost-effective to recycle.
Unfortunately, I don't think we are there yet.
Unlike plastics, metals are recycleable wirh 100% efffectiveness, the later product is not lesser or worse quality.
The typical pieces which are exposed to the outside and can suffer damages.
See:
https://www.fairphone.com/en/2020/12/18/living-wage/
https://www.fairphone.com/en/category/good-working-condition...
So no, the chip in the core module would require a new core module - which often means buying a new phone (though I replaced it with that of a friend's when my FP 2 started having some issues). The parts most likely to break, though - screen, battery, USB port - are easily replaceable.