6 ms·

How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

203 points by CrypticShift 29d ago

Halan 29d ago
Ethical phone maybe only hardware wise, software wise with Google it is far from ethical
- greggoB 29d ago
  Nobody is suggesting Fairphone has also replaced Google/Android re SW/OS. What they've arguably done I'd improve the existing situation - surely that counts for something? There is also nothing precluding them from dropping Android in the future and putting effort into something like Sailfish OS.
  - grapheneos 26d ago
    Fairphone provides very poor updates much worse than iPhone, Pixel, Samsung flagship or many other devices. They lag far behind partial backports of security patches to older releases of Android. They lag a year or more behind full security patches which are not all backported to older Android releases, similarly to iOS. Fairphone 5 and earlier have an end-of-life kernel without security support and the same fate awaits the newer devices. Unlike AOSP, SailfishOS has a largely closed source user interface and application layer. They still have their own UI and application layer so it's strange to portray Android using a different one than desktop Linux as a problem and a closed source alternative to it as a solution. SailfishOS drastically reduces privacy, security, usability, battery life and app compatibility compared to simply using AOSP. It's not possible to build a project like GrapheneOS on top when so much of the OS code is closed source rather than only many mainstream apps people want to use.
    - gib444 25d ago
      > Fairphone provides very poor updates much worse than iPhone, Pixel, Samsung flagship or many other devices. They lag far behind partial backports of security patches to older releases of Android. They lag a year or more behind full security patches which are not all backported to older Android releases, similarly to iOS. How can we verify all those claims?
      - singing_tartly 22d ago
        Easy to see they don't have Android 17 yet on their website so cannot get all security patches. The claimed patch level is about a month late. Search online and see reports updates slow down cause they're busy. Maybe newer phones get faster updates for a year then slow down to every few months. I found that by googling. Found a post on the FP forum. FP4 was released with support for 5 years but SoC was only going to be supported for 2 more years so no firmware updates for 3 of them. idk why you ask GOS these questions. They know their stuff and shouldnt have to do research for people like a LLM. I didn't know and used Google and found enough to believe what they say.
        grapheneos 21d ago
        They lag 1-2 months behind the Android Security Bulletins which are months behind when patches can first be shipped by vendors. Verifying their kernels for the FP5 and earlier are end-of-life can be done by looking at the code. It's straightforward to verify they're a year or more behind on major updates and that those are required for full security patches. It's clear from a basic glance at the Android Security Bulletins that Low and Moderate severity patches are not backported. It's harder to demonstrate they don't backport all High and Critical severity patches but it's true and the gap of what's not backported is growing with recent changes. They made an announcement to OEMs about only the most recent 2 major yearly versions getting most High and Critical severity backports along with even those no longer getting a large portion of High and Critical internally found bugs which were found with LLMs.
        gib444 21d ago
        > idk why you ask GOS these questions It's called a discussion forum. This isn't GOS' personal press release website. They can use their own website for that. > They know their stuff They can link to sources then to show their confidence, as any decent academic would do
- fsflover 29d ago
  You can run postmarketOS on it, although some features are not supported yet: https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_(Gen._6)_(fairphone-fp6) https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_(Gen._6)_(fairp...
  - MattTheRealOne 29d ago
    Now that Fairphone officially sells phones in the United States, I am likely going to get one specifically because it supports postmarketOS. My Pinephone is so slow that I have never really used it for anything beyond testing.
- mixmastamyk 28d ago
  Why are the comments below flagged/dead?
jqpabc123 29d ago
The new $650 Fairphone Gen 6+ is designed both for longevity and easy repairability. I applaud the concept but to see how well this actually holds up in the real world, let's check the Fairphone web site. Where are the parts to repair any version prior to Gen 6? I don't see them listed anywhere. So it would appear that "longevity" is actually pretty limited.
- VileSquirrel 29d ago
  It's in shop --> "all parts" (under the "spare parts" header) Here are the ones for the fairphone 4: https://www.fairphone.com/shop/category/spare-parts-4?category=4&filters=33 https://www.fairphone.com/shop/category/spare-parts-4?catego... I however couldn't find the ones for the fairphone 3. The fairphone 4 is from 2021, which is not that old.
  - jqpabc123 29d ago
    So "longevity" is actually about 5 years. Or less if you live in the USA.
    - colingauvin 29d ago
      Early Fairphones were not necessarily designed for repairability. That is a principle that has emerged significantly in the last few iterations. The FP4 was the first that was really designed and marketed as fully modular from what I remember, and parts are still available. For the American piece, the FP6 was the first available from OEM in the US.
      - n_plus_1_acc 29d ago
        The FP 3 was marketed as "you can replace the camera for a better one"
      - hommelix 29d ago
        I still have various spare parts of my fp2: screen, camera, battery. This was in 2015 and it was modular and repairable. For the fp1, it was possible to replace the battery.
dorianniemiec 29d ago
I have a Fairphone 5, chose that mainly because of repairability. :)
mentalgear 29d ago
Great what they are doing - yet I found Shiftphone to be also fair, equally or better repairable and even more open for alternative Operating Systems. I think Fairphone supports 2 OSes officially, Shiftphone has a whole custom ROM list of ~10. https://www.shift.eco/en/shiftphone-8/ https://www.shift.eco/en/shiftphone-8/
- Aachen 29d ago
  Ten? So like Android and Linux flavors? I'm not sure I even know of ten: e/OS, Calyx, Lineage, Ubuntu Touch, eh is there like Mobian or something still alive... how do they get to ten?? Do they also all fully work? Camera and calling (and not only on 2G) for example? I'd be interested in the list, the website you've linked is super sparse (the full menu is like shop, some feel-good pages about device deposit and impact, blog, and contact us - no knowledge base, documentation, or somewhere where you'd expect to find OS info or even downloads)
  - mentalgear 29d ago
    their marketing is really low-key and they must improve it because they have enticing products. OS offers page: https://www.shift.eco/shiftos/ https://www.shift.eco/shiftos/
    - Aachen 28d ago
      Okay that's six: the ones I forgot are iodéOS and Postmarket (possibly the most popular Linux mobile, idk how I forgot about them), plus Shift's own custom OS which I'll count as two because there's a googleful and a googleless variant which is a relatively significant change, plus LineageOS and e/OS which I had mentioned. That's a lot of choice indeed! Thanks for the link
      - d3Xt3r 28d ago
        SailfishOS is another popular mobile Linux distro you should be aware of - it's been around for a long, long time - in fact its heritage can be traced all the way back to Nokia's Maemo OS (circa 2005), which became famous in the community with the Nokia 900. And then in 2010, Maemo merged with Intel's Moblin to become MeeGo (featured on the Nokia N9). The MeegGo engineers who were let go (due to Nokia x Microsoft) then created Mer, and eventually started a new company called Jolla, who created SailfishOS based on Mer. It's been 13 years already since SailfishOS was out, and if you include the Maemo heritage, it makes it the oldest surviving mobile Linux distribution.
Valodim 29d ago
Not an expert, but I recently heard that apparently not everything is perfect in fairphone land: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-stand...
- jampekka 29d ago
  Seems you have to compromise on HW openness and ethics vs paranoia.
  - Cider9986 29d ago
    It's paranoia to want ≥ security than an iPhone or stock Pixel?
    - eloisant 29d ago
      It depends who you are. If you're Edward Snowden, or even a high ranking politician, it's a sane precaution. If you're just a rando like me yes, it's paranoia.
      - MostlyStable 29d ago
        I think this has historically been true and is still approximately true now. But I think in the relatively near future (less than 5 years) there's a really good chance it won't be true anymore. Once open models catch up to the current frontier in vulnerability exploitation, the cost to target people will go way down. In the past, the cost to hack a random individual person was generally high enough that if there wasn't some special reason to hack you in particular, it wasn't worth it. That may no longer be the case in the near future. The floor of what is acceptable security for the General Public probably needs to rise quite a bit over the next few years.
        DaSHacka 29d ago
        Why would you assume Google, Apple, and defense-oriented agencies like CISA wouldn't also have access to those same models, but using them to fix issues? Its just raising the bar across the board, I don't see how only attackers would benefit.
heikkilevanto 29d ago
Happy FairPhone 4 user here. Running 3+ years, only replaced the battery once. Aim to keep it 7-10 years, barring unforeseen events like theft. Not going to replace it just because a newer model is released.
- mmastrac 29d ago
  I've been running mine for ~4ish I think, on my third battery and might run out my fourth because it's feeling a _little_ sluggish at times. I am waiting for the next FP model where I can use a USB-C/dp external display and then I'm all over it.
  - is_true 29d ago
    That's a lot, I usually use old phones from family members, most of them have 4 years of use by the time I get them and I get a whole day of usage from the battery.
    - mmastrac 29d ago
      Honestly, not sure. I use Firefox Mobile pretty heavily during the day and I suspect it's part of the drain. I'm not too concerned by it and I just try to replace the battery every ~1-1.5 years.
      - is_true 25d ago
        Me too. But I always have the screen on the lowest brightness possible and use ublock. I mostly read text based pages.
  - dmos62 29d ago
    What is happening to your batteries? I'm on something like year 6 on my Redmi and my battery is fine. Am I simply lucky?
    - ctenb 29d ago
bigstrat2003 29d ago
I would love a Fairphone, but no headphone jack is a nonstarter for me. Still blows me away that a company saying they are focused on longevity would get rid of a universal audio interface that we've had for decades. In the article they claim it's to fit other features in, but frankly that's not a believable claim. Other manufacturers manage to get a headphone jack in just fine, without any noticeable downside.
- mdp2021 29d ago
  I absolutely concour about the need of a headphone jack - I do not buy anything without it. So, > to fit other features in what exactly, one would ask. If there are tradeoffs, if would be nice if the customers can decide what to have, in a modular product.
  - neobrain 29d ago
    > If there are tradeoffs, if would be nice if the customers can decide what to have, in a modular product. A "modular product" has tradeoffs in and of itself (such as size, price, water resistance, …), which presumably would not fly for a majority of customers.
    - sellmesoap 28d ago
      Yes, the water resistance is what keeps my phone from dying if I go for a hike in the rain or a small splashy boat ride, replacing the water damaged motherboard isn't as sustainable as buying a used flagship phone from an earlier time.
  - prmoustache 29d ago
    At this point headphones with an usb-c connection have become nearly as common as 3.5mm trs ones. Additionally you can permamently hook a small usb-c dac with 3.5mm trs output to the headphones of your choice. Only issue is some very cheap ones are actually bluetooth headphones in disguise where the usb-c connection only exist to power the bt recepter inside the headphone. I find this completely stupid.
jeanmichelselli 29d ago
What they are doing is really great in my opinion. I really hope to see more of this in the future!
eleventen 29d ago
Are ya'll really repairing your phones? I replace mine when it can't run Google Maps smoothly anymore. After 4-5 years, on every phone I've ever had, user interactions begin to lag noticeably. Apps launch much more slowly. Intense graphical apps like maps become frustrating to use. At some point I can't take it anymore and replace the phone, long before its physical parts or battery have worn out.
- greggoB 29d ago
  I'm typing this from a Galaxy S10 I got in 2020, with Lineage 22 (Android 15) running on it. For sure it isn't the snappiest, but my only real performance issue is loading gifs on Signal, which takes several seconds for some reason. Just tried maps now, actually still fairly fine for me.
  - LM358 29d ago
    No VoLTE on any Samsung phone running non-stock OS is a dealbreaker. Sent from my Galaxy S10 running LOS
- mrgoldenbrown 29d ago
  My family's Pixels have all lasted physically long enough for Google to stop supporting them. My wife was annoyed when I told her she needed a new one because from her perspective there was nothing wrong with her existing one ( lack of security updates is not on her radar.)
- alerighi 29d ago
  I've bought new a Google Pixel 7a two years ago, paid for it 400 euros. After 1 year I've dropped it, landed on a corner, screen completely broken, replacement costed screen costed me nearly 120 euros (and was not an original screen, otherwise I would have spent more). Just costs much money because of the fucking fingerprint reader under the screen that why couldn't put it in the back of the phone as they did for many years. Broken it again, fuck it I will not repair it again, with the cost of the repair I may as well buy a new phone. Then I've decided that is worth either spending money on phones whose replacement parts doesn't cost half of the phone itself, or just buying the cheapest Xiaomi or similar chineese brand phone and when it breaks buy a new one or repair it (funny enough cheap phones are more repairable than expensive ones, so I usually repair them).
artisinal 29d ago
The recently released Fairphone 6+ runs on Android 16. I had to look that up on Wikipedia, their website doesn't even clearly state that. Android 16 is 14 months old at the moment. Android 17 was released to manufacturers 6 months ago and had a general release 2 months ago. So why does a brand new phone run an operating system from over a year ago? Does it really take over 6 months to update a phone to a new version of Android? How am I supposed to believe a company is committing to supporting a phone for a long time when at release it already runs outdated software?
- iririririr 29d ago
  this is 100% in the hands of the SoC manufacturer. Android versions are locked to kernel versions, which are locked to binary drivers to run your hardware. there's no way around that and you can't reverse engineer or do anything if you want that SoC vendor to continue to fulfill your orders (which you're already at the bottom of the fulfilment list because of low volumes)
  - artisinal 29d ago
    If this were genuinely 100% a Qualcomm limitation, I'd expect every Snapdragon 7s Gen 4 phone to be similarly stuck. But Motorola's Edge 70 Fusion uses the same SoC and was already in Android 17 beta testing in February, and Nothing's Phone (4a) and OnePlus Nord CE 6 are also slated for Android 17. So it seems the SoC isn't inherently preventing Android 17.
    - dathinab 29d ago
      it's not that simple to promise 5 year of security updates your SoC needs to also have that support for that time frame + part of your developmeant/production time (as you can't the last steps of development/production before that chip is released). Lastly you need to add the duration during which you promise the 5 years security updates. to put it simple for a 5 year guarantee you need ~8 better 10 year support for the SoC, measured from is release date a lot of phone SoC (which tend to get Android porting priority by their producer) have shorter support. Hence why the fp5 had a SoC from a product line designed for industrial embedded appliances instead of a phone SoC... but the main reason is likely simpler: They are relatively small and likely will updated FP5, 6,6+ to Android 16 roughly at the same time to not have to support multiple major Android versions for the same time. Still as long as Android 15 still gets security this doesn't matter too much. Recent major Android version IMHO often have been more disruptive then helpful. At least for me, but my guess it's this applies widely for the kind of audience which pay more because they plan to actual have the same smartphone in use for more the 3 years ;)
OroPla 29d ago
I've always been a bit curious about Fairphone, but as I only get phones that cost less than $200 (and use them until they physically break), I'll probably never get one. Still only on my second smartphone, so I'm not worried about producing more e-waste.
- fsflover 29d ago
  Have you considered Pinephone then?
  - OroPla 29d ago
    Never heard of that before. A quick search doesn't reveal sufficient documentation to form an opinion. Do you have better resources? Can't find it for sale in the online shops I usually use (Germany), either.
    - fsflover 29d ago
      https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/ https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/ https://pine64.com/product-category/pinephone/https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-convergence-package/ https://pine64.com/product-category/pinephone/https://pine64... I have one. It's slow but the feeling of owning your hardware is well worth it. Also good software can make it fast, see SXMo.
      - OroPla 29d ago
        Your first link, I had found myself, but it doesn't say a lot. Your second link 404s. https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-convergence-package/ https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-conve... Looks like it's still in beta: > Beta Edition PinePhones are aimed solely at early adopters. More specifically, only intend for these units to find their way into the hands of users with extensive Linux experience. Also, if you include taxes it's not sub $200. My current phone was about $160 including taxes when I bought it. Looks interesting, though.
kittikitti 29d ago
Reminder that Android is not Linux. The Linux phone experience is completely different from Android. People who utilize distro's like Ubuntu touch or postmarketOS demand that even firmware level binaries are open sourced. GrapheneOS is great, but it's not Linux, and not even close. If we start to confuse the two, we're confronted with the question about Unix, which is shared among both Android and iOS, so you could even say that Android is technically an iPhone. This is obviously wrong but utilizes the same logic as people claiming Android is Linux.
- grapheneos 29d ago
  Linux is a kernel. Embedded, server and mobile Linux distributions without glibc, gcc, GNU coreutils, systemd, D-Bus, Wayland, Pipewire, etc. are Linux too. Linux is not a specific desktop software stack that's largely used on FreeBSD and elsewhere too. Android Open Source Project and GrapheneOS are Linux distributions.
- grapheneos 26d ago
  > demand that even firmware level binaries are open sourced. The hardware and firmware for those devices is closed source. It's strange to claim users demand something which is not the case. GrapheneOS users want open source hardware and firmware too, but it isn't for any of these projects.
  - summm 25d ago
    Another more important angle: GrapheneOS creates an appliance, where the user has no freedoms, in that freedom aspect not better than stock Android: The users cannot realistically change any aspect of the OS. Sure, technically they could edit the source, but then they need to compile the whole system, reset their device and lose all data, be cut off from easy updates, and additionally lose remote attestation (which GrapheneOS devs call anti-competitive when used against them, but then gladly provide a variant that inevitably will be used against users.) Users cannot wield any more power over their apps than the apps admit. They cannot patch a binary app that misbehaves. They cannot reroute the environment of that app. And so on. With AOSPs and Graphenes "security model" there is nothing in-between "dumbest user" and "full-blown developer who cannot even be a proper user of that development system". The user to "advanced user" to "power user" to "tinkerer" to dev pipeline is kept dry. Most of power-user's potential self-defense mechanisms against abusive and monopolist app and service providers are intentionally neutered by Android as well as GrapheneOS. And hopefully less so by "Linux Phones"
declan_roberts 29d ago
I love the phone, but I really hate the "ethical" framing of device repairability. This is an engineering problem and we don't need to twist it through a moral framework. Phones that are repairable have superior engineering, not superior morality.
- malicka 29d ago
  It’s both superior engineering-wise and morally. The moral framing is probably more popular with folks that don’t care about engineering superiority, too.
- pbhjpbhj 29d ago
  Surely it's morally superior to limit resource use by using things for longer and repairing them when broken. I often use a weak Kantian Imperative that I couch as "if everyone did what you do would it be good, sustainable?" as a _guide_ to moral choice, it's a starting point really, but from that I think moral superiority of more repairable goods follows.
evolve2k 29d ago
Anyone have any updates on why this device can’t support or get behind Graphene OS? A repairable and secure phone is my desired option for a phone that’s truely mine and I’m sure this is true for many others also. From my understanding it’s not there as the Graphene team says that fairphone haven’t taken security hardware seriously and there’s key hardware security features missing that means they are not even interested to look at supporting the device. Keen for latest updates on this, happy to be corrected.
- Borealid 29d ago
  I believe the GrapheneOS team demands, in particular, a security feature called Memory Tagging Extensions (MTE). This feature has a phone's processor attach a "tag" to each memory location saying what's stored there and requires accesses to that memory to bear a matching tag. Buffer overflow type attacks are effectively prevented because a read into the adjoining region having a different tag gets rejected. This feature is usually NOT present in desktop computers, and has only really been implemented by the Google Pixel hardware so far. It's unclear why it's viewed as being so critically necessary for Graphene: MTE is certainly useful but I personally wouldn't say its absence indicates an "insecure" device, and it imposes both a clear performance (and battery life!) penalty and a significant hardware burden on the SoC manufacturer. It's a pretty significant trade-off. Anyway, that's the biggest single reason why GrapheneOS devs say "this hardware is not adequately secure": 99% of phone chips are excluded because they do not support MTE.
  - rustcleaner 29d ago
    While yes I am on GrapheneOS' side on these issues, I'm surprised nobody clones the GrapheneOS repo and simply disables the minimal handful of features which block it from working on devices. Maybe calling the clone CarbonOS? If MTE is required to boot GrapheneOS and Fairphones don't have MTE, then Fairphone clones GrapheneOS and disables MTE for its images. Graphene has so many features beyond just hardware security that other Androids lack, that it would be worthwhile to do this and it would still be higher security than the others (even if it's below GrapheneOS' own full security). Sensor & network permissions, storage & contact scopes, autoreboot, scrambled pin, radio auto-off, MAC address randomization, and more, I'm sure don't require MTE or Titan etc. Just follow GrapheneOS as upstream, making sure that the minimal set of changes needed to get it working on other/older devices transfers with the new updates.
phtrivier 29d ago
I suppose it's a testament to their success, but, I have a fairphone 3 from almost 6 years now, and I'm a bit annoyed that they're basically "sunsetting it" (no more software updates, no more spare parts.) My fairphone 2 had lasted 5 years, but was completely unusable at the end. My current phone works very well (again, huge kudos to the team if anyone is reading this), and I would not mind trying to reach the decade with it - but in a few months, someone (my bank, a shop, a 2FA, whatever) will ask for an unsupported android feature. I know people will give me names of exotic non-android distros, but will they run my bank's app :/ ?
- kwanbix 29d ago
  My previous phone was an OPPO Find X3 Pro phone. Incredible phone. I only changed it because it has no zoom on the cameras. But I used it for 5 years.
- rlpb 29d ago
  I had a similar experience but with the Fairphone 2. I never swapped out any parts because performance hardware upgrades never became available and it was superseded by the Fairphone 3. I've not invested again in a Fairphone since. I've no interest in paying extra for repairability I'm never going to use since they have the same obsolescence/replacement model as any other phone.
- wazoox 29d ago
  OTOH my OnePlus 5T is more than 9 year old now, and still perfectly usable (I changed the battery once).
- grapheneos 29d ago
  Fairphone 5 are already in a similar situation due to the kernels no longer having security support with no plan to take it over or move to a newer branch. Fairphone's more recent devices are headed to the same situation. The same thing happens with other components beyond the Linux kernel. People are using the devices with the belief they're receiving security support that's not being provided.
hn_submit 29d ago
EU regulations already mandate that the batteries should be user-replaceable and other parts easily replaceable. The difference between Fairphone and the competition will narrow in the future. Except for the fact that Samsung is the 800 pounds gorilla in the smartphone space which you'll know will be around for some time. How long is Fairphone going to last? Maybe the founders want to retire early and sell to the highest bidder. I'd much rather see them running GrapheneOS or /e/OS on it also.
- robin_reala 29d ago
  There’s a get-out clause in the law that allows your battery not to be required to be user replaceable if it can last 1,000 cycles while remaining at 80+%. Apple’s phones certainly meet that these days, and I imagine Samsung’s will as well (though I’m not sure if silicon carbide changes that at all).
  - gib444 29d ago
    > There’s a get-out clause in the law As all too common GDPR: "legimate interest" EU261: "exceptional circumstances", no deadlines for paying compensation etc yes yes, "no law is perfect" etc..nobody could foresee anything...downvote away
    - fsflover 29d ago
      > GDPR: "legimate interest" It doesn't allow spying though. It allows, e.g., to save your session if you intentionally logged in.
      - dzikimarian 29d ago
        That's different setting. Typical "legitimate interest" section is about sharing data with 40 "trusted partners".
        izacus 29d ago
varispeed 29d ago
[flagged]
butz 29d ago
Would be neat if Fairphone would build a real compact smartphone, something with 4" or 5" screen. Current device is too large for human pockets and all those protruding camera bumps and buttons are really uncomfortable.
ElijahLynn 29d ago
The Fairphone 6+ looks really interesting but I'm not seeing it having the ability to wirelessly charge. I exclusively charge my Pixel 10 XL Pro (25w+) phone on a wireless charger now in the car and at my house and really like it, I don't want to go back to plugging in a USBC cable anymore unless it's an emergency. Am I missing something? Does it support Qi 2?
williebeek 29d ago
Was really happy with my FP3 until it died: "sudden death". No power, nothing. According to their own forum, it's a very common problem after a while. Of course there is no warranty and replacing the mainboard is not possible...
- mikae1 29d ago
  > Of course there is no warranty You always have the right to a minimum 2-year guarantee from the moment you received the goods. However, national rules in your country may give you extra protection.[1] [1] https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...
gib444 28d ago
[flagged]
gib444 28d ago
[flagged]

203 points by CrypticShift 29d ago

Halan 29d ago

Ethical phone maybe only hardware wise, software wise with Google it is far from ethical

greggoB 29d ago
Nobody is suggesting Fairphone has also replaced Google/Android re SW/OS. What they've arguably done I'd improve the existing situation - surely that counts for something? There is also nothing precluding them from dropping Android in the future and putting effort into something like Sailfish OS.
- grapheneos 26d ago
  Fairphone provides very poor updates much worse than iPhone, Pixel, Samsung flagship or many other devices. They lag far behind partial backports of security patches to older releases of Android. They lag a year or more behind full security patches which are not all backported to older Android releases, similarly to iOS. Fairphone 5 and earlier have an end-of-life kernel without security support and the same fate awaits the newer devices. Unlike AOSP, SailfishOS has a largely closed source user interface and application layer. They still have their own UI and application layer so it's strange to portray Android using a different one than desktop Linux as a problem and a closed source alternative to it as a solution. SailfishOS drastically reduces privacy, security, usability, battery life and app compatibility compared to simply using AOSP. It's not possible to build a project like GrapheneOS on top when so much of the OS code is closed source rather than only many mainstream apps people want to use.
  - gib444 25d ago
    > Fairphone provides very poor updates much worse than iPhone, Pixel, Samsung flagship or many other devices. They lag far behind partial backports of security patches to older releases of Android. They lag a year or more behind full security patches which are not all backported to older Android releases, similarly to iOS. How can we verify all those claims?
    - singing_tartly 22d ago
      Easy to see they don't have Android 17 yet on their website so cannot get all security patches. The claimed patch level is about a month late. Search online and see reports updates slow down cause they're busy. Maybe newer phones get faster updates for a year then slow down to every few months. I found that by googling. Found a post on the FP forum. FP4 was released with support for 5 years but SoC was only going to be supported for 2 more years so no firmware updates for 3 of them. idk why you ask GOS these questions. They know their stuff and shouldnt have to do research for people like a LLM. I didn't know and used Google and found enough to believe what they say.
      - grapheneos 21d ago
        They lag 1-2 months behind the Android Security Bulletins which are months behind when patches can first be shipped by vendors. Verifying their kernels for the FP5 and earlier are end-of-life can be done by looking at the code. It's straightforward to verify they're a year or more behind on major updates and that those are required for full security patches. It's clear from a basic glance at the Android Security Bulletins that Low and Moderate severity patches are not backported. It's harder to demonstrate they don't backport all High and Critical severity patches but it's true and the gap of what's not backported is growing with recent changes. They made an announcement to OEMs about only the most recent 2 major yearly versions getting most High and Critical severity backports along with even those no longer getting a large portion of High and Critical internally found bugs which were found with LLMs.
      - gib444 21d ago
        > idk why you ask GOS these questions It's called a discussion forum. This isn't GOS' personal press release website. They can use their own website for that. > They know their stuff They can link to sources then to show their confidence, as any decent academic would do
fsflover 29d ago
You can run postmarketOS on it, although some features are not supported yet: https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_(Gen._6)_(fairphone-fp6) https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_(Gen._6)_(fairp...
- MattTheRealOne 29d ago
  Now that Fairphone officially sells phones in the United States, I am likely going to get one specifically because it supports postmarketOS. My Pinephone is so slow that I have never really used it for anything beyond testing.
mixmastamyk 28d ago
Why are the comments below flagged/dead?

jqpabc123 29d ago

The new $650 Fairphone Gen 6+ is designed both for longevity and easy repairability. I applaud the concept but to see how well this actually holds up in the real world, let's check the Fairphone web site. Where are the parts to repair any version prior to Gen 6? I don't see them listed anywhere. So it would appear that "longevity" is actually pretty limited.

VileSquirrel 29d ago
It's in shop --> "all parts" (under the "spare parts" header) Here are the ones for the fairphone 4: https://www.fairphone.com/shop/category/spare-parts-4?category=4&filters=33 https://www.fairphone.com/shop/category/spare-parts-4?catego... I however couldn't find the ones for the fairphone 3. The fairphone 4 is from 2021, which is not that old.
- jqpabc123 29d ago
  So "longevity" is actually about 5 years. Or less if you live in the USA.
  - colingauvin 29d ago
    Early Fairphones were not necessarily designed for repairability. That is a principle that has emerged significantly in the last few iterations. The FP4 was the first that was really designed and marketed as fully modular from what I remember, and parts are still available. For the American piece, the FP6 was the first available from OEM in the US.
    - n_plus_1_acc 29d ago
      The FP 3 was marketed as "you can replace the camera for a better one"
    - hommelix 29d ago
      I still have various spare parts of my fp2: screen, camera, battery. This was in 2015 and it was modular and repairable. For the fp1, it was possible to replace the battery.

dorianniemiec 29d ago

I have a Fairphone 5, chose that mainly because of repairability. :)

mentalgear 29d ago

Great what they are doing - yet I found Shiftphone to be also fair, equally or better repairable and even more open for alternative Operating Systems. I think Fairphone supports 2 OSes officially, Shiftphone has a whole custom ROM list of ~10. https://www.shift.eco/en/shiftphone-8/ https://www.shift.eco/en/shiftphone-8/

Aachen 29d ago
Ten? So like Android and Linux flavors? I'm not sure I even know of ten: e/OS, Calyx, Lineage, Ubuntu Touch, eh is there like Mobian or something still alive... how do they get to ten?? Do they also all fully work? Camera and calling (and not only on 2G) for example? I'd be interested in the list, the website you've linked is super sparse (the full menu is like shop, some feel-good pages about device deposit and impact, blog, and contact us - no knowledge base, documentation, or somewhere where you'd expect to find OS info or even downloads)
- mentalgear 29d ago
  their marketing is really low-key and they must improve it because they have enticing products. OS offers page: https://www.shift.eco/shiftos/ https://www.shift.eco/shiftos/
  - Aachen 28d ago
    Okay that's six: the ones I forgot are iodéOS and Postmarket (possibly the most popular Linux mobile, idk how I forgot about them), plus Shift's own custom OS which I'll count as two because there's a googleful and a googleless variant which is a relatively significant change, plus LineageOS and e/OS which I had mentioned. That's a lot of choice indeed! Thanks for the link
    - d3Xt3r 28d ago
      SailfishOS is another popular mobile Linux distro you should be aware of - it's been around for a long, long time - in fact its heritage can be traced all the way back to Nokia's Maemo OS (circa 2005), which became famous in the community with the Nokia 900. And then in 2010, Maemo merged with Intel's Moblin to become MeeGo (featured on the Nokia N9). The MeegGo engineers who were let go (due to Nokia x Microsoft) then created Mer, and eventually started a new company called Jolla, who created SailfishOS based on Mer. It's been 13 years already since SailfishOS was out, and if you include the Maemo heritage, it makes it the oldest surviving mobile Linux distribution.

Valodim 29d ago

Not an expert, but I recently heard that apparently not everything is perfect in fairphone land: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-stand...

jampekka 29d ago
Seems you have to compromise on HW openness and ethics vs paranoia.
- Cider9986 29d ago
  It's paranoia to want ≥ security than an iPhone or stock Pixel?
  - eloisant 29d ago
    It depends who you are. If you're Edward Snowden, or even a high ranking politician, it's a sane precaution. If you're just a rando like me yes, it's paranoia.
    - MostlyStable 29d ago
      I think this has historically been true and is still approximately true now. But I think in the relatively near future (less than 5 years) there's a really good chance it won't be true anymore. Once open models catch up to the current frontier in vulnerability exploitation, the cost to target people will go way down. In the past, the cost to hack a random individual person was generally high enough that if there wasn't some special reason to hack you in particular, it wasn't worth it. That may no longer be the case in the near future. The floor of what is acceptable security for the General Public probably needs to rise quite a bit over the next few years.
      - DaSHacka 29d ago
        Why would you assume Google, Apple, and defense-oriented agencies like CISA wouldn't also have access to those same models, but using them to fix issues? Its just raising the bar across the board, I don't see how only attackers would benefit.

heikkilevanto 29d ago

Happy FairPhone 4 user here. Running 3+ years, only replaced the battery once. Aim to keep it 7-10 years, barring unforeseen events like theft. Not going to replace it just because a newer model is released.

mmastrac 29d ago
I've been running mine for ~4ish I think, on my third battery and might run out my fourth because it's feeling a _little_ sluggish at times. I am waiting for the next FP model where I can use a USB-C/dp external display and then I'm all over it.
- is_true 29d ago
  That's a lot, I usually use old phones from family members, most of them have 4 years of use by the time I get them and I get a whole day of usage from the battery.
  - mmastrac 29d ago
    Honestly, not sure. I use Firefox Mobile pretty heavily during the day and I suspect it's part of the drain. I'm not too concerned by it and I just try to replace the battery every ~1-1.5 years.
    - is_true 25d ago
      Me too. But I always have the screen on the lowest brightness possible and use ublock. I mostly read text based pages.
- dmos62 29d ago
  What is happening to your batteries? I'm on something like year 6 on my Redmi and my battery is fine. Am I simply lucky?
  - ctenb 29d ago

bigstrat2003 29d ago

I would love a Fairphone, but no headphone jack is a nonstarter for me. Still blows me away that a company saying they are focused on longevity would get rid of a universal audio interface that we've had for decades. In the article they claim it's to fit other features in, but frankly that's not a believable claim. Other manufacturers manage to get a headphone jack in just fine, without any noticeable downside.

mdp2021 29d ago
I absolutely concour about the need of a headphone jack - I do not buy anything without it. So, > to fit other features in what exactly, one would ask. If there are tradeoffs, if would be nice if the customers can decide what to have, in a modular product.
- neobrain 29d ago
  > If there are tradeoffs, if would be nice if the customers can decide what to have, in a modular product. A "modular product" has tradeoffs in and of itself (such as size, price, water resistance, …), which presumably would not fly for a majority of customers.
  - sellmesoap 28d ago
    Yes, the water resistance is what keeps my phone from dying if I go for a hike in the rain or a small splashy boat ride, replacing the water damaged motherboard isn't as sustainable as buying a used flagship phone from an earlier time.
- prmoustache 29d ago
  At this point headphones with an usb-c connection have become nearly as common as 3.5mm trs ones. Additionally you can permamently hook a small usb-c dac with 3.5mm trs output to the headphones of your choice. Only issue is some very cheap ones are actually bluetooth headphones in disguise where the usb-c connection only exist to power the bt recepter inside the headphone. I find this completely stupid.

jeanmichelselli 29d ago

What they are doing is really great in my opinion. I really hope to see more of this in the future!

eleventen 29d ago

Are ya'll really repairing your phones? I replace mine when it can't run Google Maps smoothly anymore. After 4-5 years, on every phone I've ever had, user interactions begin to lag noticeably. Apps launch much more slowly. Intense graphical apps like maps become frustrating to use. At some point I can't take it anymore and replace the phone, long before its physical parts or battery have worn out.

greggoB 29d ago
I'm typing this from a Galaxy S10 I got in 2020, with Lineage 22 (Android 15) running on it. For sure it isn't the snappiest, but my only real performance issue is loading gifs on Signal, which takes several seconds for some reason. Just tried maps now, actually still fairly fine for me.
- LM358 29d ago
  No VoLTE on any Samsung phone running non-stock OS is a dealbreaker. Sent from my Galaxy S10 running LOS
mrgoldenbrown 29d ago
My family's Pixels have all lasted physically long enough for Google to stop supporting them. My wife was annoyed when I told her she needed a new one because from her perspective there was nothing wrong with her existing one ( lack of security updates is not on her radar.)
alerighi 29d ago
I've bought new a Google Pixel 7a two years ago, paid for it 400 euros. After 1 year I've dropped it, landed on a corner, screen completely broken, replacement costed screen costed me nearly 120 euros (and was not an original screen, otherwise I would have spent more). Just costs much money because of the fucking fingerprint reader under the screen that why couldn't put it in the back of the phone as they did for many years. Broken it again, fuck it I will not repair it again, with the cost of the repair I may as well buy a new phone. Then I've decided that is worth either spending money on phones whose replacement parts doesn't cost half of the phone itself, or just buying the cheapest Xiaomi or similar chineese brand phone and when it breaks buy a new one or repair it (funny enough cheap phones are more repairable than expensive ones, so I usually repair them).

artisinal 29d ago

The recently released Fairphone 6+ runs on Android 16. I had to look that up on Wikipedia, their website doesn't even clearly state that. Android 16 is 14 months old at the moment. Android 17 was released to manufacturers 6 months ago and had a general release 2 months ago. So why does a brand new phone run an operating system from over a year ago? Does it really take over 6 months to update a phone to a new version of Android? How am I supposed to believe a company is committing to supporting a phone for a long time when at release it already runs outdated software?

iririririr 29d ago
this is 100% in the hands of the SoC manufacturer. Android versions are locked to kernel versions, which are locked to binary drivers to run your hardware. there's no way around that and you can't reverse engineer or do anything if you want that SoC vendor to continue to fulfill your orders (which you're already at the bottom of the fulfilment list because of low volumes)
- artisinal 29d ago
  If this were genuinely 100% a Qualcomm limitation, I'd expect every Snapdragon 7s Gen 4 phone to be similarly stuck. But Motorola's Edge 70 Fusion uses the same SoC and was already in Android 17 beta testing in February, and Nothing's Phone (4a) and OnePlus Nord CE 6 are also slated for Android 17. So it seems the SoC isn't inherently preventing Android 17.
  - dathinab 29d ago
    it's not that simple to promise 5 year of security updates your SoC needs to also have that support for that time frame + part of your developmeant/production time (as you can't the last steps of development/production before that chip is released). Lastly you need to add the duration during which you promise the 5 years security updates. to put it simple for a 5 year guarantee you need ~8 better 10 year support for the SoC, measured from is release date a lot of phone SoC (which tend to get Android porting priority by their producer) have shorter support. Hence why the fp5 had a SoC from a product line designed for industrial embedded appliances instead of a phone SoC... but the main reason is likely simpler: They are relatively small and likely will updated FP5, 6,6+ to Android 16 roughly at the same time to not have to support multiple major Android versions for the same time. Still as long as Android 15 still gets security this doesn't matter too much. Recent major Android version IMHO often have been more disruptive then helpful. At least for me, but my guess it's this applies widely for the kind of audience which pay more because they plan to actual have the same smartphone in use for more the 3 years ;)

OroPla 29d ago

I've always been a bit curious about Fairphone, but as I only get phones that cost less than $200 (and use them until they physically break), I'll probably never get one. Still only on my second smartphone, so I'm not worried about producing more e-waste.

fsflover 29d ago
Have you considered Pinephone then?
- OroPla 29d ago
  Never heard of that before. A quick search doesn't reveal sufficient documentation to form an opinion. Do you have better resources? Can't find it for sale in the online shops I usually use (Germany), either.
  - fsflover 29d ago
    https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/ https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone/ https://pine64.com/product-category/pinephone/https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-convergence-package/ https://pine64.com/product-category/pinephone/https://pine64... I have one. It's slow but the feeling of owning your hardware is well worth it. Also good software can make it fast, see SXMo.
    - OroPla 29d ago
      Your first link, I had found myself, but it doesn't say a lot. Your second link 404s. https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-convergence-package/ https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-conve... Looks like it's still in beta: > Beta Edition PinePhones are aimed solely at early adopters. More specifically, only intend for these units to find their way into the hands of users with extensive Linux experience. Also, if you include taxes it's not sub $200. My current phone was about $160 including taxes when I bought it. Looks interesting, though.

kittikitti 29d ago

Reminder that Android is not Linux. The Linux phone experience is completely different from Android. People who utilize distro's like Ubuntu touch or postmarketOS demand that even firmware level binaries are open sourced. GrapheneOS is great, but it's not Linux, and not even close. If we start to confuse the two, we're confronted with the question about Unix, which is shared among both Android and iOS, so you could even say that Android is technically an iPhone. This is obviously wrong but utilizes the same logic as people claiming Android is Linux.

grapheneos 29d ago
Linux is a kernel. Embedded, server and mobile Linux distributions without glibc, gcc, GNU coreutils, systemd, D-Bus, Wayland, Pipewire, etc. are Linux too. Linux is not a specific desktop software stack that's largely used on FreeBSD and elsewhere too. Android Open Source Project and GrapheneOS are Linux distributions.
grapheneos 26d ago
> demand that even firmware level binaries are open sourced. The hardware and firmware for those devices is closed source. It's strange to claim users demand something which is not the case. GrapheneOS users want open source hardware and firmware too, but it isn't for any of these projects.
- summm 25d ago
  Another more important angle: GrapheneOS creates an appliance, where the user has no freedoms, in that freedom aspect not better than stock Android: The users cannot realistically change any aspect of the OS. Sure, technically they could edit the source, but then they need to compile the whole system, reset their device and lose all data, be cut off from easy updates, and additionally lose remote attestation (which GrapheneOS devs call anti-competitive when used against them, but then gladly provide a variant that inevitably will be used against users.) Users cannot wield any more power over their apps than the apps admit. They cannot patch a binary app that misbehaves. They cannot reroute the environment of that app. And so on. With AOSPs and Graphenes "security model" there is nothing in-between "dumbest user" and "full-blown developer who cannot even be a proper user of that development system". The user to "advanced user" to "power user" to "tinkerer" to dev pipeline is kept dry. Most of power-user's potential self-defense mechanisms against abusive and monopolist app and service providers are intentionally neutered by Android as well as GrapheneOS. And hopefully less so by "Linux Phones"

declan_roberts 29d ago

I love the phone, but I really hate the "ethical" framing of device repairability. This is an engineering problem and we don't need to twist it through a moral framework. Phones that are repairable have superior engineering, not superior morality.

malicka 29d ago
It’s both superior engineering-wise and morally. The moral framing is probably more popular with folks that don’t care about engineering superiority, too.
pbhjpbhj 29d ago
Surely it's morally superior to limit resource use by using things for longer and repairing them when broken. I often use a weak Kantian Imperative that I couch as "if everyone did what you do would it be good, sustainable?" as a _guide_ to moral choice, it's a starting point really, but from that I think moral superiority of more repairable goods follows.

evolve2k 29d ago

Anyone have any updates on why this device can’t support or get behind Graphene OS? A repairable and secure phone is my desired option for a phone that’s truely mine and I’m sure this is true for many others also. From my understanding it’s not there as the Graphene team says that fairphone haven’t taken security hardware seriously and there’s key hardware security features missing that means they are not even interested to look at supporting the device. Keen for latest updates on this, happy to be corrected.

Borealid 29d ago
I believe the GrapheneOS team demands, in particular, a security feature called Memory Tagging Extensions (MTE). This feature has a phone's processor attach a "tag" to each memory location saying what's stored there and requires accesses to that memory to bear a matching tag. Buffer overflow type attacks are effectively prevented because a read into the adjoining region having a different tag gets rejected. This feature is usually NOT present in desktop computers, and has only really been implemented by the Google Pixel hardware so far. It's unclear why it's viewed as being so critically necessary for Graphene: MTE is certainly useful but I personally wouldn't say its absence indicates an "insecure" device, and it imposes both a clear performance (and battery life!) penalty and a significant hardware burden on the SoC manufacturer. It's a pretty significant trade-off. Anyway, that's the biggest single reason why GrapheneOS devs say "this hardware is not adequately secure": 99% of phone chips are excluded because they do not support MTE.
- rustcleaner 29d ago
  While yes I am on GrapheneOS' side on these issues, I'm surprised nobody clones the GrapheneOS repo and simply disables the minimal handful of features which block it from working on devices. Maybe calling the clone CarbonOS? If MTE is required to boot GrapheneOS and Fairphones don't have MTE, then Fairphone clones GrapheneOS and disables MTE for its images. Graphene has so many features beyond just hardware security that other Androids lack, that it would be worthwhile to do this and it would still be higher security than the others (even if it's below GrapheneOS' own full security). Sensor & network permissions, storage & contact scopes, autoreboot, scrambled pin, radio auto-off, MAC address randomization, and more, I'm sure don't require MTE or Titan etc. Just follow GrapheneOS as upstream, making sure that the minimal set of changes needed to get it working on other/older devices transfers with the new updates.

phtrivier 29d ago

I suppose it's a testament to their success, but, I have a fairphone 3 from almost 6 years now, and I'm a bit annoyed that they're basically "sunsetting it" (no more software updates, no more spare parts.) My fairphone 2 had lasted 5 years, but was completely unusable at the end. My current phone works very well (again, huge kudos to the team if anyone is reading this), and I would not mind trying to reach the decade with it - but in a few months, someone (my bank, a shop, a 2FA, whatever) will ask for an unsupported android feature. I know people will give me names of exotic non-android distros, but will they run my bank's app :/ ?

kwanbix 29d ago
My previous phone was an OPPO Find X3 Pro phone. Incredible phone. I only changed it because it has no zoom on the cameras. But I used it for 5 years.
rlpb 29d ago
I had a similar experience but with the Fairphone 2. I never swapped out any parts because performance hardware upgrades never became available and it was superseded by the Fairphone 3. I've not invested again in a Fairphone since. I've no interest in paying extra for repairability I'm never going to use since they have the same obsolescence/replacement model as any other phone.
wazoox 29d ago
OTOH my OnePlus 5T is more than 9 year old now, and still perfectly usable (I changed the battery once).
grapheneos 29d ago
Fairphone 5 are already in a similar situation due to the kernels no longer having security support with no plan to take it over or move to a newer branch. Fairphone's more recent devices are headed to the same situation. The same thing happens with other components beyond the Linux kernel. People are using the devices with the belief they're receiving security support that's not being provided.

hn_submit 29d ago

EU regulations already mandate that the batteries should be user-replaceable and other parts easily replaceable. The difference between Fairphone and the competition will narrow in the future. Except for the fact that Samsung is the 800 pounds gorilla in the smartphone space which you'll know will be around for some time. How long is Fairphone going to last? Maybe the founders want to retire early and sell to the highest bidder. I'd much rather see them running GrapheneOS or /e/OS on it also.

robin_reala 29d ago
There’s a get-out clause in the law that allows your battery not to be required to be user replaceable if it can last 1,000 cycles while remaining at 80+%. Apple’s phones certainly meet that these days, and I imagine Samsung’s will as well (though I’m not sure if silicon carbide changes that at all).
- gib444 29d ago
  > There’s a get-out clause in the law As all too common GDPR: "legimate interest" EU261: "exceptional circumstances", no deadlines for paying compensation etc yes yes, "no law is perfect" etc..nobody could foresee anything...downvote away
  - fsflover 29d ago
    > GDPR: "legimate interest" It doesn't allow spying though. It allows, e.g., to save your session if you intentionally logged in.
    - dzikimarian 29d ago
      That's different setting. Typical "legitimate interest" section is about sharing data with 40 "trusted partners".
      - izacus 29d ago

varispeed 29d ago

[flagged]

butz 29d ago

Would be neat if Fairphone would build a real compact smartphone, something with 4" or 5" screen. Current device is too large for human pockets and all those protruding camera bumps and buttons are really uncomfortable.

ElijahLynn 29d ago

The Fairphone 6+ looks really interesting but I'm not seeing it having the ability to wirelessly charge. I exclusively charge my Pixel 10 XL Pro (25w+) phone on a wireless charger now in the car and at my house and really like it, I don't want to go back to plugging in a USBC cable anymore unless it's an emergency. Am I missing something? Does it support Qi 2?

williebeek 29d ago

Was really happy with my FP3 until it died: "sudden death". No power, nothing. According to their own forum, it's a very common problem after a while. Of course there is no warranty and replacing the mainboard is not possible...

mikae1 29d ago
> Of course there is no warranty You always have the right to a minimum 2-year guarantee from the moment you received the goods. However, national rules in your country may give you extra protection.[1] [1] https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...

gib444 28d ago

[flagged]

gib444 28d ago

[flagged]