Just to make it explicit: people who stay on Android 11 will not be able to install the bi-monthly security updates over-the-air (OTA) but have to use the manual installation method.
Which means for people who haven’t updated to A13 yet (and reverted back to A11 the way described above) and simply stayed on A11 for now, they’ll have to unlock the bootloader (and wipe their data in the process) to install the updates, right?
Update: A11 updates can be installed via sideload without wiping the data
Because of the lack of this firmware update, the fingerprint sensor could not be qualified “Strong” anymore and “Strong” could be a prerequisite for some apps to use it, like the banking apps. Our fingerprint is now classified as Class 2 and you can find more information here in the Android Compatibility Definition Document (CDD).
So if you can’t update or repair it > It’s not yours.
And it’s not open.
It’s against longlivety and failed to be sustainable.
Has it? I’ve been clicking ‘check for updates’ every day for two weeks now, because I want to add a few more apps to the app fingerprint support status wiki page, but it still says ‘Android 11, no updates available’.
Sadly, I don’t think there is any real way of improving this. The firmware suppliers only support the devices for x years and that’s unlikely to ever change.
The issue also boils down to cost, as mentioned before. The FP3 is ancient compared to most phones, and any larger amounts of components are unlikely to sell.
FP definitely messed up, but not being able to replace a ~4 year old component is completely understandable IMO.
FP definitely messed up, but not being able to replace a ~4 year old component is completely understandable IMO.
I don’t entirely agree with this statement. That would be fine in general, but not when you’re advertising with longevity and environmental friendliness. If you get your sales by making a promise then you have to deliver on the promise and ~4 years is far from the expected lifespan of the device.
If you look at it from an economic point of view then while it doesn’t make sense to replace it, then again that would mean that they never intended to deliver on their promise and that would be false advertising and a big no-no.
Longevity means being able to use it as intended for a very long time. This includes the fingerprint sensor, which is no longer 100% functional. If my phone broke down to the point where I could only make and receive calls, it would still technically be functional, but it would no longer be possible to use it as intended. As long as all original functions are still present or replaced with an equivalent or better solution, the smartphone is 100% functional. Longevity is the length of time that the device works 100%, not 50%, 80%, or even 99%.
For me, not getting security updates is not an option for security reasons, nor is not having a strong fingerprint sensor. For me, a smartphone works as long as I would be willing to buy it again with the current features (at a cheaper price, of course). That’s not the case, I wouldn’t use a smartphone without a strong fingerprint sensor, even if it were free.
That’s your opinion. But for sure the phone is not nonfunctional or unusable. A lot of people don’t use the fingerprint sensor at all for safety reasons.
It’s of course always a pity, if something, you are used to is not working completely anymore. But blaming Fairphone for not holding promises is just inappropriate. Nobody could even think of this possibility, when the development of the device started, maybe five years ago.
Do you know your fingerprint reader was already unsafe before the Android 13 upgrade ? The only thing that has changed is that now apps have the information.
First things first, they said they tried to secure a long-term support contract with the fingerprint sensor supplier, but couldn’t. So they knew it could be a problem. So what you are saying is obviously wrong.
What would you suggest as an objective measure of the phone’s functionality? 90% functional? 50% functional? And what percentage do you lose from a dead battery, or in this case a sensor? The only objective way of measuring is 100%. Everything either works as intended or it doesn’t. My car doesn’t work properly, if the headlight doesn’t work, even if I could drive it perfectly during the day.
What I find inappropriate is your statement. As you said, it’s my opinion and I feel like they haven’t kept their promises because I can’t use my phone as intended after maybe half of its lifespaneven though it was advertised as having longevity. And you believe you have the right to tell me my feelings are “inappropriate.” Why? Don’t you think you’ve crossed a line? If you don’t share that feeling, that’s fine, but your statement isn’t okay at all.
@Alain_Guillet
Technically you are right. The sensor’s firmware no longer provides strong security.
But 1.: No security is secure forever. It’s a constant struggle. No encryption currently in use can withstand a quantum computer. Although ciphers exist that can do this, they are still under development and are not used. So what you say is true, but it applies to everything and at all times.
2nd: Other manufacturers have older phones with still strong fingerprint sensors, so they could have been prepared for that (choose sensor with better security or longer support). If a long-term support contract could not be secured with the supplier, they could have contractually agreed to receive the firmware source code after support expired (not an uncommon contractual clause) or altered the construction of the phone to make the sensor easily replaceable and to use the 4 years to find a way to get a better sensor as a replacement option. While I see no willful lying in this, I do see unacceptable negligence (at least for me it’s unacceptable. to each their own opinion).
Not at all. I never said, that your feelings are ‘inappropriate’, and you were never talking about them, But you said:
That is just accusing a company that they are betraying, and that is for sure inappropriate in this case.
Don’t call me a liar. Even if it was clear at the beginning of the development, that there will be no firmware support for the fingerprint sensor after probably three years. It wasn’t foreseeable that it means that Google down-rates the sensor now.
The consequence would have been to build a phone without a fingerprint sensor ‘for longevity reasons’.
Except for Apple, that can easily put pressure on its providers because they sell a millions of phones every year, I don’t know another company that made 4 upgrades of the OS (from Android 9 to 13) for a phone out in 2019. The Samsung Galaxy S10, released in 2019, stopped at Android 12 for example.
Okay, step by step, because I feel like we’re talking past each other.
They knew this could become a problem. They took the risk, most likely for cost reasons. They didn’t know when it was going to happen, but they knew it was going to happen, maybe in three years, maybe in 15 years (Google is constantly evolving the definition of safe). If you choose to take a risk, you are responsible for taking the fall or you choose not to set expectations of longevity. At the moment I don’t feel that they take responsibility for their decision. While this would be fine if the problem was unsolvable, I don’t think it would be fine if they didn’t solve it just because it would cost them money. You take the risk, you take the fall. Because of this, I dismiss economic reasons and I believe that if they didn’t solve the problem just for economic reasons, they would break their promise. If I didn’t make that clear enough before, I apologize.
Being wrong and lying are two completely different things. I have never called you a liar and I would never call you a liar and I would ask that you refrain from making such accusations.
As mentioned earlier, the definition of safe is constantly changing. There were better sensors and they decided against it. foreseeable now => no. foreseeable at all => yes. They had options and while I don’t blame them for their choices, right now I blame them for not taking responsibility (maybe that will change, who knows).
@Alain_Guillet
I can’t disagree. Some older and cheaper phones managed to still have security updates (A12+) and a strong fingerprint sensor. So it would have been possible, but it didn’t happen. When a company advertises longevity, I expect them to intentionally perform in a way that other companies “accidentally” perform. Nothing more, nothing less (okay more would be nice, but it’s not a must).
You are confusing security updates and OS upgrades.
By the way, Fairphone offers exactly what you want : just stay on Android 11 or go back to it and then you get a working fingerprint reader and security updates every two months as you read in FAIRPHONE 3 and 3+ A13 - Fingerprint sensor update - #347 by mikiballester. Nobody knows how long it is going to last but you can do it.
I guess you know a company needs to earn money and sure they could ignore that, however than we will shortly have no updates for any FP for the sake of having a few new fingerprint sensors🤔
We never know everything so maybe we should be a bit more careful in jugding in my eyes.
I am totally fine with the upgrade. I am Austrian but I have a second phone where I activated Digitales Amt. Now I even have a real second factor authentication. This is an issue with the app, not with the OS on the phone.
I am grateful that Fairphone invested effort in developing a Android 13 upgrade path so that the phone can longer be supported. THANKS!!
And I finally got rid of the connection issues I experienced with A11 on my private wifi.
If now only I could reduce the volume of my WhatsApp notifications I would be completely happy
Thanks to fairphone again.
