• kopasz7@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 days ago

    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.

    • xeekei@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 days ago

      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.

        • xeekei@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 days ago

          Louis Rossman is a perfect example of someone who’s angry all the time.

          • kopasz7@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            And an attack on his character is of zero relevance to the topic of Fairphone and jack ports.

            • xeekei@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              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?

              • kopasz7@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                9 days ago

                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 greenwash 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.

            • xeekei@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 days ago

              No.

              Two identical replies from two different accounts at the same time makes me think I’m responding to a bot, tho.

              • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                9 days ago

                Just unfortunate timing I would think lol

                Great minds think alike I guess.

        • Bahnd Rollard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 days ago

          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.

          • Logi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 days ago

            So… they chose to make a very Pixel-specific OS and you’re mad at Fairphone?

            • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              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.

      • kopasz7@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        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.