I’ve used my ATM-card’s NFC-function it once and got so excited that I did not hold the card long enough to the receiver… 
Still it must be much more comfortable than opening an app on a smartphone (considering that your battery hasn’t run out of power…!).
1 Like
As I get the gist of the comments so far
positive:
- good specs, will be up-to-date for a long time
- modularity
- easy to repair, add future functionality
negative:
- easy to repair, add future functionality
- price, price, price,
- subscription: no details on provider plans. Are provider plans available in all countries?
- high investment
Some thoughts that may address these issues
The modularity for easy upgrading can be used in a different way: use it for downgrading. Personally I don’t need Gorilla glass, or the high-end processor. So, let’s replace those parts with cheaper elements, like medium-performance processor, and Dragontrail glass. Both cheaper. Also, the mic has noise cancellation: is it possible to take a cheaper mic with SW-based noise cancellation? If I want higher specs for some part I buy that separately, similar to buying an NFC module somewhere in the future. So my phone could cost for example 425€
FP works with a web payment company; that comes at some cost. What about a payment company that also provides credit to the customer (Hovi)? For example, a phone of 525 is paid in installments of something like 50€/month. Or my phone in 12 installments of 40€. FP gets the money early in the process, our investment is spread-out, and the credit provider also get’s a cut. Something what the operator is doing, but without the subscription.
Well, thoughts that may reduce cost and that don’t compromise the specs for people who want the best of the best. Buying enough, rather than buying the maximum possible. Buy a Skoda if you don’t need the Mercedes. May even fit with the FP values.
some thoughts
5 Likes
i must agree that the price is high. i have a fp1 and wanted to buy 2 more for my wife and kid. but with this prices that will not be possible, 
i too watched the news closely and hoped for the phone to come out. but now I’m disappointed.
Is it not a possibility to sell the fp1 again?
2 Likes
I have noticed on the arstechnica article it says
…priced rather competitively at €525 (~£380, $590)
5 Likes
It immensely depends on your point of reference. ArsTechnica compares it to similarly speced phones. There it compares favorably.
On the other hand people here in the community compare the new edition to the first Fairphone or other low to mid-range phones. And if you focus on price, it definitely is a steep increase.
About your question on selling the fp1 again, @tibi, I can imagine that some current FP1 users would like to upgrade, that could lead to some more second hand FP1s being offered for sale?
4 Likes
I do understand, don’t get me wrong. I think price will definitely be an issue for some, and that’s why I hope by working with operators/networks the FP2 will be able to sell to everyone
1 Like
you are so right…
IF I should buy a FP2, I’d look for someone who is willing to buy my FP1-first edition, which is still in a very good condition.
and btw - how old is my FP1? I guess something like 18 month, but I hoped to use it as long as I used my samsung galaxy s1. I owned it for over three years and only replaced it because I got my FP1 and I wanted to support the idea and be a “ambassador” for the fairphone… well… I hope the fp2 will be longer lasting as it supports the newest OS from android.
@Ro_Land_Pickl, I’m in the same shoes: Had the Samsung Galaxy S1 for more than three years and switched to Fairphone afterwards. I am (as many others) disappointed by the lack of possibilities to update or change the OS. I’d love to order a Fairphone 2.
However if I’m honest to myself, I know I don’t need a new phone. The first edition Fairphone is still good for my needs. It would be a waste to buy a new one already. Therefore I will stick to it.
Ultimately this is what the Fairphone (especially the second edition) is about: Sustainability. Using a phone as long as possible is part of that. Of course, if you find someone to buy your old phone, it’s (almost) the same thing.
1 Like
The new Fairphone may have many nice features (the transparent case, some modularity, etc.). But unfortunately folks at Fairphone don’t really care about software freedom. Since FP2 will run on a Qualcomm platform, the most freedom loving OS, i.e. Replicant, will not be ported to the Fairphone. For me that is a showstopper. I just don’t see why I should spend € 525 on something that doesn’t qualify as a game changer.
If I want to spread happiness in the world, I rather invest these very € 525 in ice cream for anybody’s kids.
4 Likes
I just read this blog post by Fairphone’s CTO: https://www.fairphone.com/2015/06/16/the-architecture-of-the-fairphone-2-designing-a-competitive-device-that-embodies-our-values/
It’s a long read, and I think most of you have already read it, but I’m editing it in at the top right now, including some details that are revealed in the blog post.
2 Likes
I think this is a very high expectation. It’s virtually impossible to build a phone that is totally free. AFAIK there is no phone for which all parts of Replicant work even though Replicant doesn’t even have all features of Android.
I agree that it would be nice to have such a phone but I doubt that it’s possible to find all hardware parts that only use free firmware. And then one would need to consider the price of such parts.
Buying ice cream for children definitely spreads happiness but only in the short term. Eventually it might be more sustainable to invest into a phone that goes towards the right direction in terms of freedom (although that’s not the #1 issue that Fairphone wants to address) and change industry in the long run.
4 Likes
@tan Can you elaborate on the underlying (technical) reasons? I was assuming Firefox OS and Ubuntu Touch were technically able to work on this platform, although I might be overlooking some details on that. Regarding Replicant the wiki page mentions that Qualcomm is bad for freedom, but lacks a clear explanation. I found one Replicant forum post referring to the news of Qualcomm taking forcing the takedown of Github repositories on the basis of copyright infringement.
Taken this as a given I would conclude that no fully free software operating system would be possible. Distributing mainly free images would only work with participation of Fairphone to provide the neccessary binary blobs. As was mentioned earlier alternative OS’s are being discussed, although I’m very interested to get a sense of the actual possibilities. Can you please indicate if these (practical) restrictions are actually the case?
2 Likes
@jftr Getting free software supported chips is a challenge indeed. To get free software support in a product therefore requires either selecting supported chips or reverse engineering drivers to cope with other chips. This might result in having to select less capable hardware to deliver on the promise on freedom. The EOMA68 project has addressed this issue by offering computing modules which can be replaced as more capable and/or more free hardware becomes available. In that regard I’m hoping Fairphone’s current modular design will allow a different core to be developed on this platform which might be less powerful but more freedom-respecting.
To me changing an industry seems naive, but Fairphone seems able to create a sanctuary where human values are respected in development. Whether you intend to adhere to them in use, or not. (if you like to use Google’s Android, contribute your data to Google, and use proprietary applications, that is up to you to decide).
What mainly bugs me is the lack of an outspoken strategy to deal with this issue.
3 Likes
One technical reason seems to be, that the platform checks the boot loader’s signature (see
Replicant blog comment). Another factor is Qualcomm’s system on chip design, where the modem has too much control over the phone. Which leads to the question: why waste time on a system that doesn’t respect freedom in the first place and will never allow more freedom?
(That is what I gather from the Replicant site. I myself don’t have the specific expertise to make such statements.)
1 Like
@tan Thanks for the interesting link. The GAT04 tackles the issue of the modem by having it seperated from the rest of the system. The modem itself is subject to regulations, so implementing say a software-defined-radio solution is not possible. As it is a ‘black blox’ with a receiving end, giving it broad access to other processes is a bad idea indeed.
I’m hoping that the signature-checking can be turned off permanently for this phone as not to further complicate free software efforts.
1 Like
@nicorikken A Fairphone which implements the GAT04 philosophy would make me happier than winning the lottery. But that’s obviously clearly over the top. I just wish they had the courage to make better use of the solutions the upstream industry already offers.
1 Like
A strange strategy to first build up a community around a certain phone and then design a phone that doesn’t target that community anymore because it is, simply speaking, too expensive. What percentage of your current community would buy this phone?
If you’re so modular in design, why can’t you sell a highend and a midrange phone at the same time? If everything is easily exchange- and replaceable you “just” need to swap the expensive parts for cheaper ones.
3 Likes
I think unfortunately that’s a little unrealistic. Fairphone is a small company - developing one phone costs a lot of money. What you are suggesting is technically possible though and it may be something they consider in the future. It would be great to see!
2 Likes
@TheDon that’s quite ‘paradoxal’ isnt it? Fairphone tries to build a phone that lasts. Why use cheaper (not so good) parts which break faster, which in its turn produces more waste …
2 Likes