Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 265 posts

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#111

Post by phtrivier »

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 :/ ?

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#112

Post by upboundspiral »

ValdikSS wrote: post #102
esarbe wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you charge your phone while listening to music?

With a charging input + 3.5mm dongle? https://ae-pic-a1.aliexpress-media.com/kf/Sfa5566c711b14a4aa...

Going from separate ports to one port, when its easy to yank the headphone cord and ruin the usb-c so now you can't charge your phone is great.

I've tried those dongles and they are all a huge hassle compared to just having a headphone jack built in.

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#113

Post by stymaar »

microtonal wrote: post #99
mapontosevenths wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a user. What does Android 17 do for me that 16 doesn't?

Getting security updates for issues that are not marked high/critical. These are not your typical RCE, but they are used in exploit chains. For those not aware, Android Security Bulletins only cover high/critical vulnerabilities. There are also rumors that Google will soon stop fixing vulnerabilities in not-actual versions that were discovered by Google in LLM-driven vulnerability discovery. There was recently a Grap…

> Getting security updates for issues that are not marked high/critical. These are not your typical RCE, but they are used in exploit chains.

Aren't those back-ported for a while?

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#114

Post by mdp2021 »

prmoustache wrote: post #61
mdp2021 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

I tried the "jack to USB-C" in the only product I was forced to that needed it: an unthinkable battery drain.

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#115

Post by microtonal »

dathinab wrote: post #70
artisinal wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

Still as long as Android 15 still gets security this doesn't matter too much.

It does matter, because Android Security Bulletins only contain fixes for high/critical vulnerabilities. But all the other vulnerabilities can be useful in exploit chains. Add to that that ASBs have a three month embargo, but GrapheneOS and Samsung roll all/some patches out before they are in a security bulletin. So phones like the Fairphone have critical/high CVEs have been known for up to three months for anyone that looks.

but the main reason is likely simpler:

I think the main reason is that they do not do most hardware and software development by themselves, it's done by their Chinese ODM T2Mobile, for which Fairphone is probably just another customer.

Everything is at glacial speed. For instance, Android 16 on FP6 has some IPv6 bugs that breaks WiFi connections after a few minutes for a substantial number of their customers [1]. Six months later, they still haven't been able to properly fix it.

[1] The issues itself is probably not restricted to WiFi, it's that some brands of WiFi routers trigger one or more of the condition. One of which is sending a router advertisement with a lifetime of 0 for the IPv6 prefix used by the network. The connection handling code goes in a state where it misses the next prefix advertisement.

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#116

Post by [deleted] »

dathinab wrote: post #70
artisinal wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

[deleted]

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#117

Post by upboundspiral »

DaSHacka wrote: post #86
MostlyStable wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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.

Attackers only need to win once, defenders need to win every time. The game is skewed in favor of the attackers, and AI only exarcebates this.

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#118

Post by hn_submit »

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.

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#119

Post by ValdikSS »

upboundspiral wrote: post #112
ValdikSS wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a charging input + 3.5mm dongle? https://ae-pic-a1.aliexpress-media.com/kf/Sfa5566c711b14a4aa...

Going from separate ports to one port, when its easy to yank the headphone cord and ruin the usb-c so now you can't charge your phone is great. I've tried those dongles and they are all a huge hassle compared to just having a headphone jack built in.

Well yes, I agree, but the option is there.

Re: How Fairphone built the Fairphone Gen 6+

#120

Post by robin_reala »

hn_submit wrote: post #118

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 hig…

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).
Post reply on HN