4 ms·

I guess it might be necessary for marketing reasons, but I'd prefer if they'd just not announce deadlines. You know you're not going to make them, these things

by Vinnl 7y ago

I guess it might be necessary for marketing reasons, but I'd prefer if they'd just not announce deadlines. You know you're not going to make them, these things always slip, again and again. I also do not really expect them to be "what the average person would consider a finished product" by Evergreen either. As far as I understand it, this is really aimed at power users and enthusiasts willing to suffer some pain for the ability to tinker and the feeling of control over your device. Which is great, but they might've been a bit clearer on that. But ah well, I suppose mistakes are inevitable, and there'll be many more - it's a young company.

smacktoward 7y ago
Even for enthusiasts, who I agree can be willing to forgive a lot of fit-and-finish type issues, the first couple of batches seem really underwhelming. I've never seen any statement from them that the current state of the software for the device is at the level of "basic web browsing, early power management," for instance. That sounds like an early alpha at best. Software issues are less concerning, though, since those can always be fixed/improved with updates. Accepting alpha quality hardware if you're in an early batch seems like a bigger deal. If you're in an early batch and get a hand-assembled box with parts rattling around inside, is that just what you're stuck with forever? When all the previous guidance was "this thing you paid for will ship in Q3 2019," why do you now have to make a choice between accepting an unfinished device now or getting a finished device sometime next year? I can see how offering that choice benefits Purism, but I can't see how it benefits the Purism customer. A lot of this just boils down to expectations management, which Purism hasn't been great at.
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  And it sounds like most of the hardware in early batches is exterior hardware that won't be ready, so I almost wonder if it could be upgradeable later (perhaps for free/cheap?) if the internal hardware is all there. But they don't really clarify whether or not that will be the case.
  - seba_dos1 7y ago
    On Matrix it was mentioned that a FAQ that answers questions like that is coming.
    - jethro_tell 7y ago
      Probably, should have seen this coming and had that ready with today's announcement. I actually find this concerning because it's a glimpse at the bubble they must be in if they thought this announcement would stand on it's own, or if they thought that it would be welcomed with applause.
Fnoord 7y ago
> I guess it might be necessary for marketing reasons, but I'd prefer if they'd just not announce deadlines. You know you're not going to make them, these things always slip, again and again. Fairphone did this with the Fairphone 3, and people complained they had to idea what the specs were going to be. Some even wondered if the company was dying. Finally, there were complaints that the marketing was "like Apple", a blasphemy. There's something to say for both methods, and there's always going to be people unhappy with any decision made.
- Vinnl 7y ago
  Haha, I guess. What's interesting there is that they did announce timelines for the Fairphone 2, and had to postpone that a number of times - to many complaints. As an enthusiast, I did prefer the way they approached it this time, and got pretty hyped by the FP 3 announcement. i also didn't see as many complaints about the uncertainty as I did before about the delays, though that's probably because there were no delay posts that people could comment on. In any case, it'll be interesting to see what approach they will take for FP4 - i.e. which they liked more.

by Vinnl 7y ago

smacktoward 7y ago

Even for enthusiasts, who I agree can be willing to forgive a lot of fit-and-finish type issues, the first couple of batches seem really underwhelming. I've never seen any statement from them that the current state of the software for the device is at the level of "basic web browsing, early power management," for instance. That sounds like an early alpha at best. Software issues are less concerning, though, since those can always be fixed/improved with updates. Accepting alpha quality hardware if you're in an early batch seems like a bigger deal. If you're in an early batch and get a hand-assembled box with parts rattling around inside, is that just what you're stuck with forever? When all the previous guidance was "this thing you paid for will ship in Q3 2019," why do you now have to make a choice between accepting an unfinished device now or getting a finished device sometime next year? I can see how offering that choice benefits Purism, but I can't see how it benefits the Purism customer. A lot of this just boils down to expectations management, which Purism hasn't been great at.

ocdtrekkie 7y ago
And it sounds like most of the hardware in early batches is exterior hardware that won't be ready, so I almost wonder if it could be upgradeable later (perhaps for free/cheap?) if the internal hardware is all there. But they don't really clarify whether or not that will be the case.
- seba_dos1 7y ago
  On Matrix it was mentioned that a FAQ that answers questions like that is coming.
  - jethro_tell 7y ago
    Probably, should have seen this coming and had that ready with today's announcement. I actually find this concerning because it's a glimpse at the bubble they must be in if they thought this announcement would stand on it's own, or if they thought that it would be welcomed with applause.

Fnoord 7y ago

> I guess it might be necessary for marketing reasons, but I'd prefer if they'd just not announce deadlines. You know you're not going to make them, these things always slip, again and again. Fairphone did this with the Fairphone 3, and people complained they had to idea what the specs were going to be. Some even wondered if the company was dying. Finally, there were complaints that the marketing was "like Apple", a blasphemy. There's something to say for both methods, and there's always going to be people unhappy with any decision made.

Vinnl 7y ago
Haha, I guess. What's interesting there is that they did announce timelines for the Fairphone 2, and had to postpone that a number of times - to many complaints. As an enthusiast, I did prefer the way they approached it this time, and got pretty hyped by the FP 3 announcement. i also didn't see as many complaints about the uncertainty as I did before about the delays, though that's probably because there were no delay posts that people could comment on. In any case, it'll be interesting to see what approach they will take for FP4 - i.e. which they liked more.