FP Security Updates need to be more frequent

Because the average non Angel on here signs up, writes three or four messages about an issue and then said user disappears forever. Some of these users feel the Fairphone support is terrible, while some feel satisfied.
The angels on the other hand are supposed to be the biggest fans of all. On this forum there’s a split between the skeptical fans and the ardent defenders of all that is FP. These users are on here every day, either criticising Fairphone or shilling them like PR managers.

There are naturally going to be clashes when an ever growing group of people expect more from a million dollar company than they are currently delivering, and another group tries to minimise any and all issues with their product and will ridicule you in the process.

The sad part of all this, along with the entire point of this thread, is that Fairphone is incredibly good when it comes to the fair aspect of their products. The communication on the other hand is worse than the communications of most indie companies.

No excuse by FP could ever make the users that lost access to their work profiles happy, but at least they would know why.

Currently we don’t even have a date for when the next security update is estimated to release. Could be tomorrow or could be in early January. And that’s kind of the problem. We don’t know anything.


You choose to answer half of my message whereas the other half points the fact that fairphone angels have very different behaviours and thoughts.

What you reproach to Amoun, can you do it also for UPPERCASE? Don’t forget both are Fairphone angels.

1 Like

At least in the case of my comment about Fairphone Angels, while I think the program is a net detriment to Fairphone’s reputation and potentially a significant liability, I was posting more to point out the confusion and speculation that abounds on these forums in contrast to others. It’s not that all the Angels are problematic, but that they’re easily mistaken by new or infrequent (or simply search result) users as speaking for Fairphone, and just add to sense of confusion, especially when those users are used to forums that do have relevant information posted by employees and liaisons.

Many modern community forums do have involvement and information from employees. Even when that information is disappointing, or has to be revised, it means that users have some sense of what’s going on. The information shuts down rampant speculation and at least ameliorates complaints. Perhaps more importantly, it means that when users, who may never participate on the forum, do a search about problems they are having, they can actually find real information, and updates, about the problem and whether it is being addressed.

As another example of employee communication about a planned update: Zoom made a very poor implementation of screen sharing under Wayland with their Linux client, making inappropriate use of private Gnome APIs that, possibly in response, were disabled by Gnome developers. Thus, like here, significant functionality stopped working for some users because of a lack of software updates. Users complained on their forums; while developers weren’t there, community liaisons in communication with them were. There were communication problems acknowledging and understanding the problem, and there were many suggested timescales from the employee posting on the forums about the eventual update that ended up being delayed, but people did at least know that the matter was being addressed, and had some sense of time scales. I was never a participant in their forums: when I started having these problems, that thread came up in a search, and I followed it for updates until it was fixed, rather than pushing my collaborators to use a different service.

With Fairphone, for the most part, the forums seem to just serve to amplify complaints and confusion. Is Fairphone doing any work on making call audio quality reasonable, or have they stopped working about that problem? Is Fairphone still legitimately working on an Android 12 update and having security updates in a timely manner, or are they turning into the many less reputable small Android manufacturers who promise updates that never happen? Is Fairphone actually not concerned about repairability, only fair trade, as some posters suggest, and is the back not meant to be removed from the FP4 *? Simple, informed updates from employees like the above, even if the comments aren’t meant to be taken as official statements, are enormously helpful in letting people know what to expect. They don’t need to be frequent and pervasive. Just comments like those, with actual information, every month or two in some of the major threads would be amazing.

(* A forum poster on the Framework community forums responded to someone asking about some DIY ideas, warning that the internal USB C plugs were likely only rated for around 500 attachment cycles. Within a day, the CEO had responded in the thread authoritatively clarifying that they were rated for 10,000 cycles. And thus ended the potentially damaging rumour. )


Out of curiosity, what kind of app(s), as an example?

New software update just arrived.

Update FP4I.A.0175 - 5th Nov. Security Update


And here’s the forum post.


@formerFP.Com.Manager, many thanks! Many around here were waiting for this :heart:

1 Like

@formerFP.Com.Manager Thanks for the update

1 Like

We are now 2 months behind again. Any info on when we could get another security patch?


Or ist the next update the android 12 one? :slight_smile:

1 Like

It’s a bit like cold fusion, it’s always somewhere in the future :nerd_face:


Pretty disappointed that we are once again several months behind, with no indication of when Android 12 will drop. Will we get a patch before Android 12 drops or is that coming next?

The only ETA we have at the moment is “early next year”

I mean, April is early in the year, right?


If it really is so much work for them, they might as well worked on Android 13 since its out for a while already. Saved them bad PR for releasing A12 so late for their flagship phone. Strange software policy to go for an older Android version.


And once again - i think, it’s actually about transparent communication, which is what I would like to see from fairphone. As a sustainable way of informing customers - what streams there are in development and planning status, when which patch is planned to be rolled out. I personally have no problem to be informed that planning wasn’t right or if the Devs run into problems - it could be explainable…
But what i have learned is, most companies are not able (or simpla do not want) to do so. I don’t know the reasons here - I am personally a little disappointed in fairpone.


Reminder that vendors actually get early access to the monthly security updates, as in Fairphone should have access to the February or maybe even March 2023 security patches as of today.


Yes, but do they also have the capacity (money + corporate will) to do something with them?

The facts say “not really”, because else they would already had released Android 13 (not to mention up-to-date patches), so it’s pretty safe to say that somewhere something is blocking.
The question is, where, how much, and can something be done about that. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

1 Like

I’m willing to donate money to get Android 13 and monthly updates. I really want them to succeed, I don’t get why they aren’t more transparent about this. Indeed, what’s blocking them. And what would be needed to unblock that. If it’s money, then a GoFundMe type of thing might be an option. If the budget is reached we get those updates, if it’s not, we get the money back.


Why would the problem be money ? The phone is sold more expensive than competitors because of the software support and for fairness, if not then the business model is wrong. Moreover, we should not forget Fairphone earns money (some millions of benefits the year before if I remember correctly).

You are in software so you should know something can block and you have to try different ways to solve it without breaking something else. Otherwise it would be easy.


Just saying that I’m willing to donate, I hope the problem is money and not people. People that are not good at what they do and hurt the company, but are too high up or rooted in the company to resign/leave.


Because something needs to be the reason they can’t hire a couple developers to get this done in (some) time: Either they don’t really care (I’d rather not believe this), or they just don’t have the liquidities required to run an efficient software team on top of the hardware expenses. There is no third possibility I can think of.

1 Like