Fairphone 2 - list of news coverage and specifications

In Germany and the Netherlands (countries which I can speak about) it is not a strange sight to see these kind of people. And not all rich people have a bad taste and wear Tommy Hilfiger :wink:

Yes, money, networks, heritage, etc. But money is a very very big part.

I completely agree that poor people’s rights might be more threatened than rich people’s. However there are two things: First of all Fairphone is very little about making a difference in lives of us Europeans (where Fairphone is sold exclusively atm). It is mostly about making a difference in the lives of the people mining minerals and building phones. These are primarely outside Europe. That means that none of our rights are changed by buying a Fairphone. Therefore rights of poor Europeans are not affected anymore than lives of rich Europeans. So why should any of those groups care differently about these topics?

Second, I really really (really!) don’t agree that poor people are more “social-concerned” than rich people. I don’t know why you would think that.

Maybe when I speak of “rich people” I have other people in mind than when you use the term. We were talking about “rich” people that can afford to buy a phone for 525 Euro. And that is not the 1%. Where I live (Germany/Netherlands) this is the majority of people (judging by how many carry the newest iPhone or Samsung flagship).

And even if we would talk about the top 1%, I’m pretty sure there are (relatively speaking) just as many people with a social conscience as in other “classes”.

This is a valid point.

I don’t know that. I think software giants are mostly operating for themselves. I don’t think Google gives a sh** about how Samsung fares :wink:

Please don’t mix different issues. Yes, there is a huge issue with planned obsolescence. And yes, some updates are not offered for hardware which might still be capable of running it. But there are many other issues involved: For instance old hardware might be able to run a new version but user experience is horrible. Or (in case of consoles) it is just to much work for publishers to develop a game for old consoles (because it is additional work).

In any case we can say that Fairphone is tackling this issue as well: They have learned from their failure with FP1 in this regard. Back then a relatively cheap Mediatek platform was chosen which made it impossible to develop and deliver operating system updates. But this makes my point and not yours: This is one of the reasons why they went for a better but also more expensive Qualcomm SoC.

Maybe in the end it really boils down to what you said: In different regions of Europe this high a price is a much larger hurdle than in other regions. Unfortunately I don’t know how this could be solved.


Wow, that really changed my point of view. You’ve hit in the target with that. Maybe Fairphone’s sales strategy is not that wrong. Maybe I’m just sad that after all this time waiting, finally I’ll have to pick one of these Samsung that comes for free with the telecom contract :’( And guess that there are many people like me.

That said, I think there is no point in discussing the rich/poor thing in this context. The reality that you talk about is hugely different from mine. I’ve not seen an iPhone 6 yet, at least not outside stores. I suppose Europe is not as homogeneous as we may think.

@ben and @jftr: you didn’t understand what I was trying to say with this:

Obviously private companies’ only goal is their own profit. But the way that software companies make profit is by developing for the latest platform. We as consumers accept as normal the fact that developing for an old platform has no sense. So we see as normal that after a few years we MUST update our hardware in order to be able to run the latest software, even if it is in perfect physical state. And this is where hardware giants come in.

So, that’s life, but it wouldn’t necessarily be like that. Those into the GNU/Linux world can see that there exists a lot of old software that keeps being updated, and keeps running on really old machines. Because there are developers that not only think for the latest platform. They allow users to keep on their computers until the hardware dies, with all the security updates and bugfixes they need, but of course not with next-gen features that can only work well on a modern machine.

All this stuff is making me think… What if almost every person in the world had an smartphone? Would it be sustainable? Even if it was a Fairphone? If not… is it “fair” that we lucky people use smartphones made by other people that will never have a smartphone? Don’t care about the answers as much as about the questions.

1 Like

That is a very interesting point. I do no see a good solution. The only thing i can think of is deriving a formula that relates the price to the income per country (region? city?) and works in that all prices are balanced and still the Fairphone is not sold a loss by making sure the average price is still above 525€. That would probably make to phone more expensive in Sweden for example, and cheaper in Greece. It sounds very complicated and does not address that fact that some people in Greece will be much richer then some people in Sweden.

What about a personal price? Very complicated to calculate and would require the disclosure of your financial situation to Fairphone.

An interesting, but probably unrealistic Experiment: Something that is done sometimes at alternative restaurants, for example, is to not set a fixed price, but a price recommendation. Fairphone has the best pre-requisites for that since it discloses the constitution of the price in the cost breakdown.

It could work as follows: Fairphone would publish the recommended price of 525€ and explain its reasoning for that in the shop and to the press. Reviewers will probably relate to that recommendation as resonable or to expensive.
Fairphone then sets a fixed lower limit based on cost, for example, so that manufacturing costs are always paid for, or even slightly lower. It might also set an upper limit based on the difference from lowest to recommended price.
When you pay for the device, the price would then be flexible: Starting from the recommendation, you would be able to adjust the price within the limits explained above according on your financial situation. The adjustment would be completely in users hands, trusting them to make an assessment and a good decision. An example for the current model could be (completely made up by me!):
Recommended price: 525€
Minimum: 450€
Maximum: 620€
Average price paid: 530€ :slight_smile:

This could only work if people are honest, and, some people are willing to pay more for a device so that others with less money, can pay less. Hopefully, that would balance out, so that in average, the recommended price is payed.

Sounds complicated, but interesting, not? I do think thought, this experiment should be done with smaller investments first, but somehow i think of it as intriguing.

Obviously, the average price payed must stay around 525€ and it would be much harder for Fairphone do calculate. And, it would probably not be possible that people only pay 300€ for a 525€ device.

1 Like

Good morning to all of you.

Regarding the price in different countries - why not take the “big mac index” for the price-finding?
For all of you who don’t know that index, here are two sites, that explain how it works.
–> english article: http://www.economist.com/content/big-mac-index
–> german article: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big-Mac-Index

As we now have that index fixed - we could make different prices in different countries. Now for the dark side of the game - who can handle this? FP will need a lot of people, that juggle this price-finding and giving out the bills to the right person in the right index-price.

Oh - one more thought:
As you all know - we live in a connected world. And I’m damned sure, that there ARE customers who will buy more than one FP and sell them (still cheap) to countries with a little plus, where the original-price is much higher.

One last idea:
Does anyone know www.humblebundle.com ?
There is a minimum price you have to pay for software or comic books or audio files… Whatever… The big idea behind is, that you can pay MORE than the average price. If you do, you get an extra gift (e.g. more comics or a free extra game) AND you can choose what to do with the extra money. Like - give it to the red cross or other charity organisations.

However - the more I read your comments, the more I’m sure that FP did a good job with both - the phone-specs AND the price-finding. Both sides will be satisfied (sooner or later), because one party get’s a phone that is not a premium, but ahigh-class-smartphone for a reasonable price and the other party will be happy (in later months), that they still can use their phones in three or four years, while others have bought their second or even third phone, because they are too old or not repairable…

And with that - @FP: I’m pretty sure, that I’ll order the new one and get my first edition FP1 on an auction at ebay. And to all of you --> have a nice week!!! :smile:

1 Like

Hopefully they keep producing the FP1 at a more affordable cost.

But how do they earn a living? A solution would be a lease model (like e.g. Adobe does it, but not as restrictive): Pay 10€ a year for Android updates, and if you don’t want to pay anymore, you won’t be upgraded to a new version. Only security updates would be provided after you stop your lease. What do you guys think about this?

That’s what I was thinking. It’s not possible to do such a thing in the EU (then the different VATs irritate me even more…).

I like that approach. FP should offer a FP2 without any specials for e.g. 475€, and a supporter package with T-shirt, personally signed Thank You Card, special ringtone, etc. etc. for e.g. 575€. Probably 50€ wouldn’t make much difference though…

Be sure to read this:

And you too have a nice week! :slight_smile:

1 Like

That is true in case of app developers. However Google actually went large efforts in the last years to make newer versions of Android better adaptable for older phones. Google was lacking behind on newer markets (i.e. India, South America) because Android was not able to run on cheap phones (too slow, too much memory consumption, etc). However these are large markets where many many phones can be sold. So they improved Android to be able to run on cheaper hardware. That also means that newer versions of Android actually run better on older phones than previous versions. The same is true for Fairphone 1. Android 5 would definitely run on it if there were drivers available. It would probably run better than the currently available Android 4.2. (BTW: The same is true for Microsoft Windows. Windows 10 will run on hardware that is not able to run Windows 8).

Bottom line is, I think what you say really only counts for app developers that only develop for the latest operating systems to avoid duplicate work. In case of hardware that doesn’t get updates (like our Fairphone 1) it is the fault of the manufacturer (especially Mediatek, the vendor of the SoC) that doesn’t want to pour work into a platform they only sold few and cheap devices with. They rather spend their resources on developing new phones which they will be able to sell instead of wasting resources on already sold phones.

Maybe @Stefan’s idea of a subscription model could help avoiding this. However I’m optimistic Fairphone will already do that without a subscription fee.

Yes, when reading @ben’s post I also thought of it. However that is about immaterial goods (electronic games, e-comics, e-books, etc) which are mostly paid off already. And the price is much lower. So there is less incentive to go for the lower price than it would be the case with a 500 Euro smartphone.

As far as I remember, the Big-Mac-index is mostly used by political scientists and economists for comparative studies. It’s an interesting thought to apply it to a case like this. However – as both of you already mentioned, @Ro_Land_Pickl and @ben – one needs to make sure that Fairphone’s actual costs are covered in the end.

My guess is all these interesting schemes would incur more overhead than what people would safe.

These are very good and important questions. My hope is that with initiatives like Fairphone it will be possible one day.


Oh, about that: Are you sure you are cheaper off with that strategy? Even if you don’t pay a huge amount up-front, the phone is not free. In the end you have to pay it with higher subscription costs.

For instance I have prepaid SIM-cards only. I pay 8 to 15 Euros each month for calling, texting, and internet on my phone. Of course I have to add the price of my Fairphone which was 325 Euros. Over three years (I hope it will last that long) that would be around 10 Euros per month. Getting a contract for 20 to 25 Euros a month with a relatively good phone is almost impossible. So I am (or hope I will be) better off without a subsisized phone.


Of course a Phone can be designed for more than 5 years, functionally my last mobilphone did its job nearly 8 years, not every new technology is necessary and the smartphone segment has lost most of its innovative momentum.

I think it should´t be the aim of fair phone to stay upgradeable to each new tech-trend, but it should be upgradeable for any useful (in the means of utilitaristicly useful) upgrade.

I can imagine this Fairphone lasting even a decade when its stays as reparable and maybe upgradeable as its stated.
Lets start the Decade-Challange:
Who will be th first to say: "i´ve used my Fairphone for 10 years now, and its still up to date (at least software wise with a future resource minimalistic OS) :smiley:


I would like to be the one, using my FP1 for 10 years, even without it being up to date. :slight_smile: Still I’ve not given up hope: Maybe, as time goes by, Mediatek will release its drivers (see this petition). They can’t hold on to their proprietary drivers for years and years, if they don’t gain anything from it, can they? It would be the same as with medicine, after a reasonable period of time the patents are released and everyone can produce generics!

1 Like

I think for software - unlike medicine - the copyright lasts as long as for music, movies and such which is something around 50-60 years after release or after death of author. And even then, Mediatek would have lost their copyright but that doesn’t mean that they have to publish their source codes.

Well I think that’s different because music (art in general) doesn’t lose its value over time, but software (especially these source codes) do. But that’s going OT, let’s see what the future brings! :slight_smile:

That is easy: Fairphone will buy MediaTek in 2019 to produce conflict-free mobile chipsets. Their first again is to release all source code and setup a developer central to support open source developers. :wink:


I like that idea!
How about we raise some money to buy Google and Apple as well so we can release all their proprietary software and hardware under free licenses? :smiley:

Oh wouldn’t the world be a lot better if I had unlimited funds! :sunny: :bird: :sunflower:


I haven’t found a statement yet if VoLTE will be supported. Not sure if the QC chipset supports this.


@ben @paulakreuzer If you could hear me right now and see my face… :joy: :joy: :joy: :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

1 Like

Best idea of the year!! :smile: I support that!

Yeah, sure I’ll have to check out that. Now I also have prepaid SIM, but I’m thinking of getting a subscription because my calling needs have been increased recently, and I also need a new phone.

Continue here: :slight_smile:

My .02: I really love this design, although I do hope FP1 keeps being produced as the “budget” option.

I’m currently on a Samsung Galaxy S5, and I’d like to make the move to support Fairphone. I need a powerful phone and HD screen, and I want good call quality. It seems like FP2 is going to do a much better job of this, not to mention better hardware compatibiltiy with the general Android community (processor is more compatible).

I hope FP2 is as free software compatible as possible. Software freedom is very important to me. I will probably continue to run Android, but for starters I would like to switch to CyanogenMod, rather than some in-house Android version.

$525 is less than I paid for my S5. I do wish the FP2 could be IP67, but with the modular design that’s a lot to ask.

I hate metal phones. Once they get hot they hurt your hands, they scratch, and so on. Plastic is better! I really wish people would stop pushing for the Apple style of device, where it’s all metal and glossy fingerprint-magnet plastics. Those look fine, but they don’t perform as well as other materials, and I only care about performance.


More on the 525€ phone:

  • High cost --> Rich audience
  • Rich audience --> Less compassion
  • Less compassion --> No Fairphone?

I personally have no problem shelling out 500€ for modularity and crash resistance if most of it went to 3rd world workers.