Hacker News Reader

Comment by onli | Hacker News Reader

A phone that wants to be sustainable but has no headphone jack is an oxymoron. The FP5 just isn't an option like this. Replaceable battery, SD-card slot and headphone jacks are the absolute minimum, otherwise the long software support and fair production just isn't enough. Especially not for the price, a bad compromise for 700€ is a no-go.

View on HN

What is so unsustainable about bluetooth? It has been around for quite a few years. They even offer headphones with replaceable battery and parts which should last at least as long as the phone: https://shop.fairphone.com/fairbuds-xl

The battery needed makes bluetooth headphones completely unsustainable.

Their headphones might have a replaceable battery, but headphones do not necessarily need one at all. Their earphones even have a baked in battery that is not replaceable. And in general, not having a headphone jack pushes consumers to buy bluetooth devices, of which almost none have replaceable batteries (the fairbuds-xl are the big outlier). It's an ecological disaster.

it's subject to interference, uses more battery and will just not work if you really need it.

anecdote: had a ten year old premium car with "bluetooth" but could not manage to pair it with anything - supposedly the used bt-standard is outdated or something

Wireless headphones cost more, last shorter, having no wire is not always better than having a wire. You can get cheaper wired headphones with comparable or better audio quality that will last longer and cost less.

I think that people are just assuming the worst case for wireless and best case for wired (in terms of longevity). AFAIK most wired headphones don’t have a replaceable cable, and the ones that do tend to be pricier. Personally I’ve had the same AirPods for 3 years now, and the batteries seem fine. The only pair of wired headphones that I’ve had last that long were $400 sennheisers, and I think I’m pretty careful about making sure that cable ends dog get bent and that the cables aren’t tangled.

IIRC the trade-off was:

- Repairable

- Headphone jack

- ~~Water-proof~~ Water-resistant

Choose two. They're all relevant to being sustainable, but I do think that of those three, the headphone jack is least relevant.

i call bs

headphone jack can be made watertight no problem

Yeah, I bought my phone based on the requirements:

- Headphone jack

- A functional IPXY water/dust rating

- Replaceable battery

There aren't a ton of phones that satisfy this, but I ended up with a Samsung XCover Pro and have been quite happy with it.

Of course, repairable covers more than a replaceable battery, but I do think Fairphone could have added a headphone jack without too much trouble.

What do you think about this device? I bought an iPhone SE and dropped it onto the rug in my living room and it broke so bad it won't even come on. I'm never buying another all-glass phone again.

I checked out the specs on this phone - I'd love to hear what you think about it.

they need a rubber case, preferably one that overlaps the display slightly.

If we're talking about the XCover Pro, I drop it fairly regularly (not intentionally, just clumsy), and I've yet to break the screen. The reinforced edges seem to do the trick, they've gathered a collection of dings and scratches, but the device is overall in surprisingly great shape, coming up on three years of ownership. I expect it to last a few more years at the very least. The first thing to go will probably be the security updates, but as an "enterprise" device, it should hold out a bit longer. It currently gets quarterly security updates, see https://security.samsungmobile.com/workScope.smsb

There just is no conflict between water-proofnesss, repairablity and having a headphone jack.

Water-proofness/resistance and a headphone jack does not collide at all. There are many devices that proof that. For repairability, I also do not see how this might conflict with the other goals, as quite some devices had headphone jacks that were easy to swap. Look at how the framework laptop puts them on a small audio board for example, the same had been done in phones.

So again, this is just my recollection, but glueing parts shut sounds like it should help prevent water getting into the device. So if you can't do that, I assume you get closer to not getting the certification, and then adding another hole in the device might push it over the edge?

I do remember they explicitly addressed this in the FP4 launch, so it wasn't for lack of want.

Look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_S6JaLvDck. It's a teardown of the Xperia 1 II. It shows how easy the audio jack can be removed there. The phone is certified as IP65/IP68.

The phone itself is glued, but the jack does not seem to be. It likely works with pressure and might have a gasket seal - which is not surprising if you look at how watches do it.

But I think you are right - they said something like that when the FP4 came out. But that phone is a matter of principle anyway. If it is possible to get the phone with an audio jack in a good state, but the certification process is broken, then they should not certify it (and publicly attack the certifier). The Sony phone shows it can be done on a technical level, which is what matters.

I was indeed not talking about glueing the jack, but about the rest of the phone. Not doing that will presumably lower your rating, and then adding a jack would lower it even more - and I'm guessing that would lower it beneath the water-resistant certification threshold.

Not waterproof, IP55 water resistant. Many 3.5mm jacks can absolutely manage IP55

Dammit, I was going back-and-forth between the two terms. Updated.

There's a bit of back and forth between whether people consider IPX5 waterproof or not. Personally I think the layman expects waterproof to mean you can drop it in the bath and it won't get damaged. That occupies somewhere between IPX6 and IPX7 which is why it's a bit fuzzy

I'd counter that if you get water inside an IP68, it's screwed. (My Xperia got some moisture under the screen during a long bike tour through the rain, and it never really came back out.)

Water seeping inside an IP55 because you drop it in the bath, sink, toilet, hurricane, etc? Turn the thing off right away, remove battery, get it in a box with desiccant, and it'll probably be fine in a day. If not? Still repairable.

There's a few issues with your statement. IPX1-6 are actually grouped separately to 7-8. Complying with 7-8 submersion doesn't mean that it complies with 1-6.

So IPX8 states that the device can be submersed, but makes no statement about spray/droplets. If you comply to both, then they're both stated, eg "IPx5/IPx8"

The same applies to your IPX5 statement, defined as resistant to spray but not submersible. It makes no guarantee about what could happen if you drop it in water

And finally, even the drip tests only test for 10 minutes. Anything longer than 10 minutes is not guaranteed by IPX1-5

Right. The Xperia is IP65/68. I just glossed over this because I figure most people are unaware of that nuance. It's a pretty well sealed phone, because once the condensation gets in, it does not get back out without cracking the weather seal.

If the FP5 were just a tad smaller with a telephoto (like the Xperia) I'd be all over it---water resistant or not.

For me the main concern is it not breaking if it's in my pocket while I'm out in the rain - that was a failure mode for my FP1 and has not been great for my FP2, I think.

Sony did/does this just fine with a water proof jack and a seal around it. Complete non-issue.

This is a non issue, they literally sell a USB-C to Jack adapter on their shop.

I'm not buying an adapter for a slot that can and should be built in.

Also, it absolutely is an issue in practice. Dongles get lost (-> additional garbage produced), and blocking the USB-C slot means the phone can't be charged. Especially when traveling both slots are needed all the time.

I have learned over the past 5 years that it is impossible to convince people who have chosen to die on the 3.5mm jack hill that it isn't a big deal.

I don't think it's even about the jack anymore, complaining about it is just a shibboleth for a subgroup of Stallman types who dislike the state of modern computing.

I used to be on that headphone jack hill until my headphones died. I then realized, that the market for "normal" headphones, i.e. the ones you just hang in your ears and not the ones you ram into your ear canal, has simply died while I wasn't looking. I've switched to Aeropex and have never been happier. I still think removing the jack was a stupid "hey look, we can do what Apple does" kind of move by nearly everyone, but I now can accept it and live with it.

The headphone market is booming though. Headphones like the Beyerdynamics DT 770 PRO, so the big ones, are more popular than ever. It's true that for the small wired ones that go in your ear, the ones that go more into the ear canal than sitting near it seem to be more popular right now. But the other kind still seems to be very popular, Apple has their cultists convinced those are the best thing (I'm kidding, no position on my side what's better, but they are sold a lot because Apple sells them). And there are many alternatives on the market. I could buy the Sennheiser MX 375 right now. Where did you get the impression that that category is dead?

> the market for normal headphones [...] has simply died while I wasn't looking

Are we living on the same planet?

Unfortunately, I think Sony is the only company left when considering these things

Reply on news.ycombinator.com