Really? The discussion about FP3 already started - before FP2 is shipped? As a user of FP1 I am really disappointed - “sustainable” seems to be empty word… So the now closed (!) thread " FP is definitely neither sustainable nor fair!" was more than justified.
Did you care to read what was stated by, e.g., @kevr1990, above?
Don’t be so harsh.
As long as the FP1 is still supported, i.e. as long as you get security patches and can buy a new battery (which will surely not last 5 yrs., due to, well, physics and chemistry…), and can get spare parts in case, e.g., your screen breaks, the FP1 is still more sustainable than most other devices.
The same will be true for the FP2. As long as Fairphone does support it’s user base and does not “fade out” this support, we have no reason to be disappointed. At all.
Just imagine if FP3 would be a completely fair phone. Well, to be realistic, this can’t happen. But imagine. Imagine there would be phone on the market, more or less on par with the then-current models in tech specs, but with conflic-free materials, a socially and environmentally friendly production and a good track record in supporting it’s userbase with spare parts and updates. Maybe even sold worldwide, not only in Europe.
It would be an option for people who consider buying a then-curent smartphone.
How could this be a bad thing?
Why are you disappointed? How does this affect the FP2?
I’m sorry for having started this. My text here really reads a bit “trollish”. I was not trying to start a “who’s more sustainable” fight here. My intention was to discuss the direction and future improvements for the next generation FP, even if the quoted interview would not have happened. I’m very interested in the future FP3 and how it will be done. The Fairphone project needs to sell phones/parts/services to support themselves, there is no way around that, please keep that in mind!
I think Joe mentioned above that he would check and clarify this – he does not work on the weekends (hopefully) – so I guess it’s best to wait a bit. Thanks!
I think it’s time for people to calm down… again!
At this point I don’t believe there is much point in a discussion about a FP3 other than a hypothetical one. If you all can’t control yourselves then we will close this thread too as it is adding no value whatsoever to the community in its current form. I suggest that if we want to discuss the potential of a FP3 then we start up a wishlist specifically for this, but not to have useless debate with one another.
I’d also just like to draw attention to this comment by Joe
It is not. Sales are required for Fairphone to make an impact. And while it would be nice, it is extremely unrealistic to sell the same phone for 10 years.
I do would like to remind you to stay friendly and not get unfair in the forum
I think we as a community can discuss what we want, without Fairphone losing anything, but it is sad the moderators are required to step in so often,
I fact, it is realistic for parts of the Fairphone team to already think of the next model and plan this. 18months development is realistic and some goals might need to be set forth beforehand.
FP releasing a model 3 in roughly 2017 sounds like a terrific idea to me. That does not mean support for the FP2 would need to be dropped. But it means they certainly need starting to think about it now.
Ben, I would like to highlight that in your haste to play moderator-referee you have missed the beginning of the exchange, where the other person started it by saying I was talking nonsense. At least kevr1990 thought it was fair play since contrary to you, he did not pick up that comment. I fail to see how it was unfair or unfriendly although being originally a linguist. My guess is that your interpretation did not match my meaning.
In your meticulous, point-by-point review of my post, you are developing on them more than opposing them, showing your admittance that they do make sense, although they are arguable. Any statement is arguable and discussing one another’s comments is the idea of the forum, so everything appears fine in our exchange . Banter aside, my point, really, was that I am worried that by the end of 2017, Fairphone will be not a solid, experienced or rich enough company yet to be able to provide customer support, software updates, oversee the building and distribution of spare parts for 2 devices whilst also developing then building and distributing a 3rd one.
I totally agree on your comment on the fact that the FP2 is already outdated and would not be sellable in 3 or 4 years - which makes me wonder why not come up with a fairly up-to-date spec’d phone in the first place?..
And again this is positive criticism only aimed at getting everyone thinking and talking, including the Fairphone team - I did put my 525€ in it, which should be proof enough that I support the whole concept…
I think the whole point is, many people see the next part of your sentence as the solution to your fear, whilst you see it as a threat:
I agree developing, building and distributing a 3th FP will require additional workforce. But they will only be able to pay those people and the people currently working there *, if they generate additional income… with an FP3, for example.
*AKA the people who will be able to provide customer support, software updates, oversee the building and distribution of spare parts for 2 devices
Funny that you would say that. Many people would rather have a cheaper system with less up-to-date hardware. I’m glad at least some people like you talk sense and see that this is an investment into the future and will pay off in the long run.
In any case, the hardware is rather up-to-date. Given, it is not the newest chipset, but it is a compromise between capabilities and cost. Additionally it is proven technology. What happens to some manufactureres that use the bleeding edge is examplified with the heat issues of Snapdragon 810 phones.
But yes, I agree, the SoC could be newer.
Phones with a five-year lifespan? During the 2 decades I lived in my parents’ house they had just 2 telephones. My wishlist for FP3 is that I hope it never exists. Why should Fairphone produce new models every 3 years? There are more than enough crappy Nokias in the world - all of which last way longer than 5 years and they don’t need to be modular because they never go wrong. Couldn’t we be a little more ambitious here? How about a phone for which any part can be replaced - a phone that could be kept going for 20 years?
Have you ever considered that people who don’t own a Fairphone would like to buy a phone that is not 5 years old but a bit ore modern? If you look at the development of the last 5 years - Would you today buy a smartphone from the year 2010 if it was fair?
I’ve moved two posts here from the module wishlist topic, as they concern the hardware of the entire phone, and the philosophy behind it. The moved posts are similar in content to others in this thread.
If the project is not about changing insane consumer habits, then I’m not interested in the project.
I think you are missing the point Vinni is making
I think you misunderstood Vinni. It’s not insane to buy a state of the art phone if you don’t currently have a phone. It’s just insane when you have functioning phone from two seconds ago.
If Fairphone turn out a new model every three years - i.e. if they perpetuate the idea that people need and should pursue technology that is ‘up to date’, ‘modern’, full of the latest features, etc. - it is failing to counter current consumer habits - which are insane. That’s my point, regardless of what Vinni’s point was.
Yeah well then why do you answer Vinnies post if you disregard his point?
We all got your point and wanted to tell you that your assumption about Fairphone’s motives is wrong. They intend to reach new customers that don’t have a functioning fair-smartphone yet with the new model and actually hope that not to many FP1 owners will buy the new phone if the old one still works.
I wan’t to have Virtual Reality Support in the Fairphone 3.
This would be awsome .
I think it’s important to remember that this Fairphone initiative means different things to different people.
I, for one, am far more concerned about the labor conditions of those who make the phone and source it’s materials than I am about the environmental impact of buying a new phone every two years. I understand others are far more interested in the repair-ability and recycle-ability of the phone, and I don’t begrudge them their opinion. I am interested in one particular axis of fairness, you are interested in another. Even others might get very passionate about the openness of the software, for example…
In any case, if the good folks at Fairphone envision a world where everyone’s phone lasts 5 years, I don’t think releasing a new phone every 2 to 2.5 years is incompatible with these goals of fairness. They need to sell new phones to stay alive and relevant, and while I would love to keep my phone as long as possible, I’m not buying a 4 year old model either. New customers (correctly) expect new-ish hardware. It’s just business.