That’s why I highlighted that it was just anecdotal ‘evidence’. I also don’t think I’m an expert of Android, I would like to be though. I just spot issues by using their devices in the first few minutes. Now to me that could mean they don’t actually use their devices. Also because it takes a lot of effort to describe some issues to FP support. Which also makes me wonder if they use the same device. Or maybe they just don’t see it as such a big deal, that’s also possible. In both cases it’s not great in my opinion.
I agree that it’s a myth, and I hope I’m wrong. It’s just one reason that could explain what we’re seeing for the past 2 years with the FP4. And to clarify, I do see progress in quality control. Most issues we face are from the initial release and some extra were introduced with the major update to Android 12. Hopefully the upcoming Android 13 will solve those.
Fairness goes both ways in my opinion. As I noted before, if you sell the most sustainable and fairly made clock in the world, but it cannot display an accurate time, then it’s not a usable clock for the user. That’s not really fair or sustainable either, because people will discard such a product sooner. And yes, the FP4 isn’t that bad. It does work mostly and is usable by most people. There just a few near misses in terms of quality.
I personally really want Fairphone to succeed. I really do. And the reason I make so much noise is not to argue because I’m bored or something like that. It’s because I care for Fairphone to succeed. I don’t think it helps to say that by adding one touchscreen issue to fix another is a good idea. It should just be fixed, period. When someone asks about my phone, I’ll tell them it’s great. Except for issue X, Y, Z and they haven’t improved them in the past 2 years or so. Then the costs comes up and that the issues sometimes aren’t even that complex, like the bouncing arrows in the notification bar. Or the typo’s in the settings. They are reported, but not fixed. And then of course the issues that have a bigger impact on the usability of the phone. Updates lag behind as well. The total package is just a hard sell, even when I care for fair trade and sustainability.
You really don’t have to be a power user/expert to care about these things. A smartphone is in general our most used device throughout the day, something that’s part of our daily workflow in both a professional and personal context. If things don’t work well, people will notice and care. Not everyone would go to a forum or contact support. I bet some would just return it or sell it through a 3rd party.
The situation at the moment is like this. At my workplace they want to improve their sustainability. So we’re testing the Framework laptop. In the past they did a test with the Fairphone 3, but that didn’t pass their requirements (details were not documented). I saw an internal blog article that the Fairphone 4 will be tested, so I contacted the project team here at my work. I’m involved in the project now and the plan is that I’ll get the Fairphone 5, that’s rumored to be in development as we see in the news. I’ll test it for a few months, together with some other random colleagues. If that turns out to be a success, then we’ll adopt the FP5 as an option next to the iPhone and a Samsung. So I really care. But there are limits in how much you can promote Fairphone. At the end of the day the devices have to work as well.
Now, in case the FP5 is not to my liking, then yes, in that case I’ve already decided to get a Pixel. So then you guys have some more peace 
But I have high hopes that Fairphone will nail it with the FP5. And no, a Pixel isn’t perfect either. No replaceable battery and the in display fingerprint scanner is a nightmare. But their QA of their software and camera/microphones are top notch.