BorgOvermindOne more phone name from the same factory Samsung As and Xiaomis come.
And none of the probably near 10 brands bothered to improve the design.

Really? You are aware that most phones aren't made in the same factory I hope.

noel_fsjesus christ 600€ for a 750G,

a phone from any of these brands xiaomi, poco, oneplus, asus, motorola, sony and realme (without even mentioning pixel)

will also have updates for the coming years thanks to the release of their kernel source

but at a much better ratio of price/perf-features(camera, screen, etc)


nowdays there is a niche for anything because there is always someone that would believe what someone says if they say it with confindence

wouldnt be surprised if a phone with harmless 5G waves was released, jeeeeeesus f christ

You're clearly missing the point here and this phone isn't for you and a lot of other people commenting here.

TheLostSwedeReally? You are aware that most phones aren't made in the same factory I hope.


You're clearly missing the point here and this phone isn't for you and a lot of other people commenting here.

It's not for me either, it's over my price range for a phone, $250 to 300 over.

noel_fsmotorola

good luck unlocking the bootloader on half their offerings as of late.

TheLostSwedeReally? You are aware that most phones aren't made in the same factory I hope.


You're clearly missing the point here and this phone isn't for you and a lot of other people commenting here.

Framework Laptop has taught me what I already knew. People WANT modularity and ease of repair. But not at the cost of aesthetics. And certainly not at a premium for fucks' sake. Who even needs a 5-year warranty (if it was their justification for inflated price). They're not selling to the government or something. Just disclose parts vendors and models and let third party fix shit.

I feel like all of you guys complaining about the high prices or "weak" specs are completely missing the point. First, this is quite a niche product. It's niche because of:

a) The idea: Most people don't give a flying f@#$ about the environment, the working conditions of the people involved in manufacturing stuff or that their phone is a glued together glass slab that's fiddly to repair. They just want max specs for bottom dollar and when said slab goes rock climbing and needs a display replacement, they rather just buy a new phone, because, you know, f@#$ logic and the environment. This phone doesn't appeal to them, it might not appeal to you, but the eco-bio-organic-vegan-hipster crowd will probably love it.

and

b) The execution: This is a byproduct of the previous reason. Limited appeal -> niche product -> low prouction volume. Even if the target audience were larger, the company would probably still need to manfacture and sell millions of phones before the costs per unit are becoming low enough for the retail prices to be competitive without the company paying out of their procket for every phone produced.
Also, modularity and limited engineering funding (compared to large companies) impose some limitations and challenges on design, manufacturing and performance, you have to keep that in mind.

The two main things this has going for it are the ethically sourced materials and the repair-friendly design. The first one might be questionable and difficult to prove directly, the second one is undeniable.

The omission of a 3.5 mm port is a major dick move in my book as well. I can't justify that.

@MikeMurphy - If I remember correctly the bootloader on previous models could be unlocked, so you could use their OS builds or whatever else you like best. I see no reason why this should be different.

@TheLostSwede - A couple of minor typos: the last paragraph should read: "128 GB storage SKU will set you back €579" and "both SKUs come with a five year warranty".

TheinsanegamerN"more sustainable"

How is forcing users to either wear out their USB port faster or use bluetooth headphone with finite battery lifespans more sustainable then keeping the audio port that has been standardized as long as most of us have been alive?

That's an ... interesting reading? I don't see any evidence of them claiming that the removal of the 3.5mm jack compared to previous models is more sustainable. I see them claiming that their phones overall are more sustainable than smartphones in general. Which is true. That doesn't negate the removal of the 3.5mm jack being bad, but neither does that removal in any way negate the overall benefits of their approach.

TheinsanegamerNAlso found it strange how a company went so far as to have a user replaceable battery then never offered or partnered with any company to offer an extended model. I have fond memories of my note 4's 10,000 zerolemon battery, and would love to see something like that. Plus, larger batteries wear out slower, as they need fewer recharge cycles due to longer usable abttery life.

My guess: a combination of price, sales volumes, and the difficulty of finding a partner willing to match their commitment to conflict-free and ethically sourced raw materials. Which would essentially force them into making such a battery themselves, which is bound to be a very low margin endeavor, and an expensive one to buyers. Also, the phone is already above 200g - it would likely exceed 300g with such a battery. There's also the issue of making a rear shell fitting this battery that feels decent in the hand and doesn't ruin the ergonomics of the device. Not trivial with what is already a large phone.

Nuke DukemI feel like all of you guys complaining about the high prices or "weak" specs are completely missing the point. First, this is quite a niche product. It's niche because of:

a) The idea: Most people don't give a flying f@#$ about the environment, the working conditions of the people involved in manufacturing stuff or that their phone is a glued together glass slab that's fiddly to repair. They just want max specs for bottom dollar and when said slab goes rock climbing and needs a display replacement, they rather just buy a new phone, because, you know, f@#$ logic and the environment. This phone doesn't appeal to them, it might not appeal to you, but the eco-bio-organic-vegan-hipster crowd will probably love it.

and

b) The execution: This is a byproduct of the previous reason. Limited appeal -> niche product -> low prouction volume. Even if the target audience were larger, the company would probably still need to manfacture and sell millions of phones before the costs per unit are becoming low enough for the retail prices to be competitive without the company paying out of their procket for every phone produced.
Also, modularity and limited engineering funding (compared to large companies) impose some limitations and challenges on design, manufacturing and performance, you have to keep that in mind.

The two main things this has going for it are the ethically sourced materials and the repair-friendly design. The first one might be questionable and difficult to prove directly, the second one is undeniable.

The omission of a 3.5 mm port is a major dick move in my book as well. I can't justify that.

@MikeMurphy - If I remember correctly the bootloader on previous models could be unlocked, so you could use their OS builds or whatever else you like best. I see no reason why this should be different.

@TheLostSwede - A couple of minor typos: the last paragraph should read: "128 GB storage SKU will set you back €579" and "both SKUs come with a five year warranty".

Finally at least one person here who seems to grasp the concept of what Fairphone are trying to do. Seeing the commenters here all starting from the basis that price/value or absolute performance (which ties into value) are the only possible way to judge a phone is just ... kind of baffling? Like, do people have that little perspective on the world? Fairphone has never tried to compete on price or value. That would explicitly contradict their mission - to shift value further down the production chain, ensuring better pay and working conditions in the factories and suppliers they hire, and working towards a goal of ethically and sustainably sourced materials throughout the product. Plus, they're small and independent from giant electronics companies. None of this lends itself towards being cost competitive. And frankly, that's fine. Are they there, are they perfect? Of course not. They themselves detail that in their yearly reports. But they do work - including in-person surprise audits across the supply chain - to ensure that the conditions of their contracts are upheld, and they eschew the multi-linked supply chains that modern commerce use to rid themselves of responsibility for the sourcing of their materials. For everyone else, the standard line is "We don't know where [material X] comes from, we buy it from a trusted supplier, it's their responsibility." Fairphone literally starts organizations to make possible the ethical sourcing of raw materials. And they pay attention to the entire lifecycle of the product, rather than the standard "you bought it, it's out of our hands" approach, working for repairability and longevity of the devices as well as recyclability when they are no longer serviceable. Again, I'm not saying they are perfect in any way. But at least they're genuinely trying, in a way and at a scale no other phone (or consumer electronics) maker is.

If value is the most important thing to you, that is of course an entirely valid prioritization. We don't all have the luxury of plentiful spending money. But using that perspective to criticize essentially the only actor in the smartphone space actually doing effective and impactful work for the fundamental improvement of the industry? That's, at best, a bad-faith argument.

It's also pretty striking how criticisms like these are universally leveled against companies and products genuinely trying to do good (and no, I'm not talking about giant corporations greenwashing themselves here, like that MS """ocean plastic""" mouse last week). Like, when is the last time someone criticized Porsche for delivering poor value with their cars, despite them essentially being reskinned VW frames with more powerful engines and some posh design? Oh, no, they're premium, aspirational, and as such can't be criticized for being poor value, as they deliver something more. Which is true! But so does Fairphone. What "more" it delivers is of an entirely different kind, but claiming one type of added value is valid and one isn't? That gets us into some pretty shaky territory overall, and gets us into value judgements around what is worth paying a premium for or not. If showing off your wealth and burning gas like an idiot with a luxury sports car is worth a premium for you, then that's your right, but it also makes you part of the problem globally. And it certainly makes you a very different person than who Fairphone is aiming at (though no doubt they'd love to convert as many of the overconsuming rich to more sensible patterns of consumption as they can - but I don't think that's a priority for them). And on that level, at least have the intellectual honesty to be forthright about the basis for criticizing them. (And no, this isn't directed at anyone in particular - it's more me begging you to actually consider your priorities and valuations and where they stem from. We all benefit from a critical perspective on our own preferences and habits.)

Not found of the port removal especially without better sealing... even my waterproof phone has a jack. s8.

That said, their phones are fixable and that C port is replaceable, something I can't easily do on my phone when its jack dies from using Android Auto all the time.
I would guess they are listing wifi AC because the chipset is only AX ready which means it was made before AX was certified... 6e has basically no adoption yet so its silly to expect that but 6 base/AX is pretty nice...

For 6e devices... you can currently only get 90 day fcc licenses and they only have 1 approved chipset. I have AC access points and a mixture of AX/AC devices, I would like my next phone to be at least AX but I have no intention of replacing my APs till AX (wave 2) is ready.

Currently there's no other device on the market that has unlocked bootloader (with future LineageOS support), decent camera with OIS and lack of OLED screen, which to many is a major advantage (try using navigation more than few times, 8h a time, you'll see what I'm talking about). I'm really disappointed with lack of 3.5mm jack tho. Once the price settles a little, I'm definitely buying it, because there is just no alternative.

BorgOvermindOne more phone name from the same factory Samsung As and Xiaomis come.
And none of the probably near 10 brands bothered to improve the design.

Samsung closed their China phone plant, sometime after the Galaxy S5 was made, TMK.

Here's a YouTube video about that, even when that's not the source I got my information from:

R2R Friendly or not those specs are pretty weak
my LG V50 isn't hard to repair as phones go and has double the specs

OneMoarR2R Friendly or not those specs are pretty weak
my LG V50 isn't hard to repair as phones go and has double the specs

What does "double the specs" mean? Sure, the SD855 is a good deal faster than the 750, but then the V50 was flagship-tier when it launched. This isn't, and makes no claim to it. And "isn't hard to repair" doesn't go for much compared to an actually modular phone with manufacturer-provided repair manuals, easy access to spare parts, and a design centred around repairability. (And of course it entirely lacks the Fairphone's focus on sustainability and supply chain/materials accountability.) Looking at a repair guide for the V50, the glued-on back as a point of entry already makes it a major hassle, not to mention the further glued-in battery. There are at least some modular parts in there, but how do you get a hold of spare parts? At best through semi-shady third parties. (Especially now with LG shutting down their mobile division.) So, sure, it might be okay as mainstream phones go. But the comparison is still night and day.

I don't think wireless earbuds are going to work in the mass market. You still see too high a percentage of the population using "good enough" phones that may be 5-6 generations old or just cheap and new. On the whole, the mass market doesn't need the flagship kool-aid any more. Even among flagship phone owners, very few seem to be using the expensive, premium brand wireless earbuds. Consumers - even consumers willing to spend $1000 on a phone - are largely not willing to spend $200+ on earbuds.

A decade ago, the trickle-down from flagships to mainstream phones mattered, because those features were valuable. Now, flagship features are niche - audio solutions that cost more than most phones. Cameras that are good enough to use for movie production, processing power that lets you multitask on a phone.

Most people (and by this I mean the most populous market segments, not the most profitable) don't want to become Audiophile film-producing power users, they just want a reliable, familiar device to do the one thing they need it to do at a time in a hassle-free way.

Chrispy_I don't think wireless earbuds are going to work in the mass market. You still see too high a percentage of the population using "good enough" phones that may be 5-6 generations old or just cheap and new. On the whole, the mass market doesn't need the flagship kool-aid any more. Even among flagship phone owners, very few seem to be using the expensive, premium brand wireless earbuds. Consumers - even consumers willing to spend $1000 on a phone - are largely not willing to spend $200+ on earbuds.

A decade ago, the trickle-down from flagships to mainstream phones mattered, because those features were valuable. Now, flagship features are niche - audio solutions that cost more than most phones. Cameras that are good enough to use for movie production, processing power that lets you multitask on a phone.

Most people (and by this I mean the most populous market segments, not the most profitable) don't want to become Audiophile film-producing power users, they just want a reliable, familiar device to do the one thing they need it to do at a time in a hassle-free way.

I mostly agree with your general points, but wireless earbuds are already taking over the mass market. You can easily find tons and tons of TWS earbuds in the €50-ish class, and sure, they're crap, but they're no more crap than the €20/pack-in earbuds they used to use previously (and there's a slight chance they'll take better care of them due to the higher price + necessary charging case, and no cheap, flimsy wires to wear out from getting stuffed into a pocket). People will still lose them, run them through the washing machine, etc., but there's no reason to suspect that will be at a higher rate than previously. And li-ion batteries tend to outlast cheap wires that get abused, so IMO there's a real chance for improved longevity thanks to the move to BT. But then there's also more materials used, i.e. more waste per product. Still, cheapo wireless headphones and earbuds are here to stay, and as you say, they want something hassle-free that works for their use, and for most people the reduced hassle from BT (no tangled wires, no crackling audio thanks to a failing connection) trumps the increased hassle (charging).

ValantarI mostly agree with your general points, but wireless earbuds are already taking over the mass market. You can easily find tons and tons of TWS earbuds in the €50-ish class, and sure, they're crap, but they're no more crap than the €20/pack-in earbuds they used to use previously (and there's a slight chance they'll take better care of them due to the higher price + necessary charging case, and no cheap, flimsy wires to wear out from getting stuffed into a pocket). People will still lose them, run them through the washing machine, etc., but there's no reason to suspect that will be at a higher rate than previously. And li-ion batteries tend to outlast cheap wires that get abused, so IMO there's a real chance for improved longevity thanks to the move to BT. But then there's also more materials used, i.e. more waste per product. Still, cheapo wireless headphones and earbuds are here to stay, and as you say, they want something hassle-free that works for their use, and for most people the reduced hassle from BT (no tangled wires, no crackling audio thanks to a failing connection) trumps the increased hassle (charging).

This, but the people using cheap €50 wireless earbuds are also using expensive phones. Perhaps that's a regional/demographic thing and it's different in other cities.

I guess I wasn't articulate enough in my point - but I'm not really seeing mainstream phone users bothering with wireless at all;

The people I see using wireless earbuds tend to be using them because their expensive phones lack a 3.5mm port. So they're not using them by choice because the choice was taken away from them. The fact that the cheap off-brand wireless earbuds outnumber Airpods/Bose etc out in the wild indicates that a majority of people simply don't want to spend money on earbuds even if they have lots of money to spare on expensive, disposable tech like an iPhone 12 or Galaxy S20....

Chrispy_This, but the people using cheap €50 wireless earbuds are also using expensive phones. Perhaps that's a regional/demographic thing and it's different in other cities.

I guess I wasn't articulate enough in my point - but I'm not really seeing mainstream phone users bothering with wireless at all;

The people I see using wireless earbuds tend to be using them because their expensive phones lack a 3.5mm port. So they're not using them by choice because the choice was taken away from them. The fact that the cheap off-brand wireless earbuds outnumber Airpods/Bose etc out in the wild indicates that a majority of people simply don't want to spend money on earbuds even if they have lots of money to spare on expensive, disposable tech like an iPhone 12 or Galaxy S20....

That is absolutely true. I don't think it's purely because of having the choice taken away, as I sold tons of BT earplugs (not TWS, this was before those arrived) and headphones back when I worked in retail, long before Apple removed their 3.5mm jacks - people like convenience. That was when the cheapest retail BT headphones in Norway were just starting to creep meaningfully below 1000NOK (~US$100+tax), and there were lots and lots and lots of people who were tempted to go wireless but didn't want to pay that much. Peer pressure, marketing, perceived convenience, actual convenience, and a whole bunch of other factors also play into this.

These days, when I'm out and about I generally see as many TWS earbuds as wired ones - but then I'm likely noticing them more as they tend to be larger and more conspicuous. Still, I sincerely doubt they're limited to just high-end phone users, given the vast popularity of midrange phones these days.

TheinsanegamerN"more sustainable"

How is forcing users to either wear out their USB port faster or use bluetooth headphone with finite battery lifespans more sustainable then keeping the audio port that has been standardized as long as most of us have been alive?

Also found it strange how a company went so far as to have a user replaceable battery then never offered or partnered with any company to offer an extended model. I have fond memories of my note 4's 10,000 zerolemon battery, and would love to see something like that. Plus, larger batteries wear out slower, as they need fewer recharge cycles due to longer usable abttery life.

Zerolemon gang! Had a 10k one on my optimus g pro... one of the best phone upgrades ever.

Hahaha no 3,5 Jack to use Battery powered Headphones and trow them in to the junk after 2 Years.

Na i still have a Blackberry Passport since 7 Years

seth1911Hahaha no 3,5 Jack to use Battery powered Headphones and trow them in to the junk after 2 Years.

Na i still have a Blackberry Passport since 7 Years

That's impressive! I still have (and actively use, with IMO decent battery life) my Jabra Revo BT headphones that I bought at some point pre-2016. Not quite 7 years, but a lot longer than most people keep a smartphone.