All I needed to know was when they released their BT earbuds just when the jack port got removed to figure out where their priorities are.
They are easily repairable and you don’t have to throw them away if the battery goes bad (just replace it).
How is that a bad thing? About 90% of other brands you can throw them away if the battery goes bad or they break.
How is that a bad thing?
I have to buy them? Every replaceable and repairable stuff is manufactured and has an impact.
About 90% of other brands you can throw them away if the battery goes bad or they break.
I don’t have any of those, for related reasons. The best one can do is to consume less and less often.
Buying a USB-C-2-Jack dongle or BT headset is anything but eco-friendly. It goes straight against the whole brand if you need to buy new stuff in addition to make it work.
What about people who already have a BT headset, or people who are looking to buy their first headset and don’t own one yet? You just straight up assume everyone still had a headset with wires lying around and that they somehow never break.
Having to buy something makes it bad isn’t really an argument. The very post you are making right now is made from a devide that has been manufactured at some point in time. If you start reasoning like that its better to start living in the woods with no possessions at all.
Before BT headsets even existed, all of them were wired and none of them required lithium batteries or chips inside.
Having to buy something makes it bad isn’t really an argument.
It costs resources to produce. It is one of the main missions of FP to reduce this by having to not by a new device if your current one breaks. If buying a new one wasn’t a problem, why are they trying to make it repairable?
They are easily repairable and you don’t have to throw them away if the battery goes bad (just replace it).
You get it.
If you start reasoning like that its better to start living in the woods with no possessions at all.
Taking my argument to the extreme naturally makes it absurd. But living in the woods isn’t my point.
If you look at FP’s yearly financial statements, you can see how they are struggling. In 2021 and 2022 they were roughly at a breakeven point, turning basically no profit, in 2023 their operating loss was 37% of their net turnover.
See previous comment:
I’m saying it is very hypocritical and goes against their brand. If they simply came out and said: Look guys making phones sustainably cost too much, we need to sell higher margin items like dongles, BT earbuds and cases to have enough cashflow to continue manufacturing and R&D.
Ok, fair enough. I would say.
But trying to justify and greenwashing the whole ordeal is insulting. The tactic is straight out of Apple’s “Think different” book. Paying more for reduced functionality. Only for them to sell you more accessories for even more money.
Of course they’re gonna offer BT earbuds if there’s no audio jack? Or did you want them included or something? A lot of people here are way angrier than justified.
This is the vibe I’m getting from Lemmy lately just angry people shouting at clouds.
If it makes you feel better, I do that off of Lemmy, too.
Of course they are going to offer dongles too! The profit margins are way better on those. Fuck what the users want, we want money!
Louis Rossman on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRdL0StldJM
Louis Rossman is a perfect example of someone who’s angry all the time.
Is he wrong though?
And an attack on his character is of zero relevance to the topic of Fairphone and jack ports.
I would say having a headphone jack is better than not having one, but stop short of crying conspiracy. You would feel better if they didn’t sell BT earbuds?
I’m saying it is very hypocritical and goes against their brand. If they simply came out and said: Look guys making phones sustainably cost too much, we need to sell higher margin items like dongles, BT earbuds and cases to have enough cashflow to continue manufacturing and R&D.
Ok, fair enough. I would say.
But trying to justify and greenwashing the whole ordeal is insulting. The tactic is straight out of Apple’s “Think different” book. Paying more for reduced functionality. Only for them to sell you more accessories for even more money.
Is he wrong though?
No.
Two identical replies from two different accounts at the same time makes me think I’m responding to a bot, tho.
Just unfortunate timing I would think lol
Great minds think alike I guess.
Yep same here. Also they’re not capable of installing grapheneos which is kind of a deal breaker for me.
Isn’t that up to the GrapheneOS devs?
The GrapheneOS team makes their hardware security requirments very clear.
Its up to the hardware manufactures to include a few additional components used for securely storing keys, so far Google Pixles are the only consistent line of products that do so.
So… they chose to make a very Pixel-specific OS and you’re mad at Fairphone?
It’s not about being pixel specific. They built high security OS that uses HW components to deliver that high security. It can’t be delivered without them. These components are not google patented nor does GrapheneOS demands they use the exact pixel ones. GrapheneOS just refuses to lower security to support phones that lack these components, because manufacturers wanted to save maybe a $1 per phone by not including them at the expense of user security.
I think I had this all wrong. Fairphone isn’t / doesn’t want to be an enthusiast DIY brand at all (like framework for laptops) but a mainstream brand that’s eco-friendlier* and non-exploitative.
So of course they will not care much about niche features like other ROMs or audio jacks. The privacy focused, tech-savvy or feature focused buyers are not their target.
*IC and PCB related footprint is still roughly 80% of the FP4 and FP has little to no control on those processes, according to an independent study.
