I have a FP5 and I would very much like my next phone to have more RAM and have support for docked workflows. Either with android or linux.
So my wish is for better dock support and more RAM.
I love the idea of an e-Ink phone but I think making a proper daily driver phone really requires a huge makeover of Android’s interface. Not just disabling animations, but for example making it possible to paginate lists in all apps, instead of having to scroll.
I don’t think Fairphone is a suitable company to do this.
Oh and lastly, I think a disappointing part about e ink phones is that they still only go a couple days on one battery cycle AFAIK, because of Android, connectivity and probably more reasons.
Hi all,
after a short research I found that 4K/120Hz OLED-Display is not compatible with eInk technoligy. Which only supports 30Hz (High-End). 4K/120Hz e-Ink displays are currently not available at the market. NRE-costs may exced Euro 1,000,000. I think Fairphone will not be able to handle this (for now). So at least for FP7 we should drop this idea.
Cheers, Timo
E-ink displays are inherently not conducive to high refresh rates. Partly because it is difficult to get them to refresh quickly, but also because of their lifetime. They have a limited number of refresh cycles. And if you do manage to refresh them quickly, they also degrade quickly.
If you don’t refresh them very often, their lifetime is a lot bigger.
I had a look at e-ink displays wondering whether they would be suitable for an ESP32 based clock and found out about that. Doing some calculations, I figured that maybe they would work if I refreshed them every minute, but even refreshing them every second they wouldn’t last very long (it’s a 60 times shorter life span).
1 Like
Hi,
thanks for this quite intressting futher information. I did not know it in this depth.
Are you possiably en engineer?
You are at least becomming a Knowmorebody 
Timo
Regarding e‑ink, headphone jack, small display, wireless charging etc.: Since the USP of the Fairphone is sustainability and fairness rather than serving technical niche preferences, and since there will only be one Fairphone model rather than a full product range, the FP7 should follow current mainstream trends and standards. To appeal to as many users as possible, it should ideally resemble a modern flagship device from Apple or Samsung.
At the same time, it should be future‑proof and versatile enough to support a wide range of alternative operating systems. This implies a relatively powerful CPU, more RAM than currently required, and a modern USB interface.
Edit: Of course, these ideal requirements (“flagship device”, “relatively powerful”, etc.) have to be balanced against a reasonable price, which in my view shouldn’t exceed 650 euros.
7 Likes
No, I think this is misinformation. The only related topic i could find on the web is that France bans usage of headphones while driving. And that some manufacturers disable FM chips on their boards. It would cost money to properly support FM radio, so I guess the manufacturers simply skip that feature.
1 Like
A boring functional phone. Sustainable, fair and future-proof. Future proof probably means higher specs. More robust components (longevity). Open-ness for other operating systems.
Maybe also easier to maintain by the company. Ensure that one does not need a backup phone (i.e. faster customer support/repairs) - or provide one. Standardize battery form factor; at least find common ground with likeminded competitors (e.g. shiftphone) so it is easier to source batteries.
3 Likes
Nitpicking but i agree
OpenTitan exist pioneerd by google patent free and proven in real life Iot so far besieds Pixel Devices with Titan M chip
1 Like
Yea
true USB c can wear fast
It does not matter whether its IME or OpenTitan.
Software contains bugs - always. Even hardware contains bugs.
Therefore a hardware security chip will have security flaws, but it is working invisibly like a ghost with unlimited power.
This is THE target to attack!
This is worse that anti virus software, which is mainly an attack vector and hardly any protection.
1 Like
If they just copy what everyone else does, what would distinguish them? They should offer the things mainstream brands don’t offer.
As far as features go, I would say that if a feature can just be ignored by people who aren’t interested, I would probably include it anyway. This includes a headphone jack, wireless charging, FM radio, screen output over USB.
I personally probably wouldn’t use wireless charging, an FM radio, or screen output over USB. But since there are people who would use those, I would say just include them anyway, and everyone who doesn’t use them can simply ignore them.
The one thing I want is a headphone jack. And again, that’s something that can simply be ignored by those who don’t use it.
1 Like
What distinguishs them is repairability and fair sourcing and production.
4 Likes
It works invisibly but you have control over it.
For GrapheneOS to work properly and securely, you’d need such. Without it, no GrapheneOS. That a secure element is a weak point, is true, and that the security chip will have flaws is also true, but the same is true for a SoC or a browser. Yet, we still use both.
1 Like
The Fairphone couldn’t fully resemble a mainstream phone because it needs to be modular for repairability. Mainstream phones don’t bother with that. The higher manufacturing cost of Fairphone and the companies ability to get the latest hardware also make it difficult and prohibitively expensive to keep up with the latest phone technology.
I don’t think most people need the bleeding edge hardware. If you’re using a phone as a phone / communication device / browser and not playing some kind of demanding games on it or something, most people probably wouldn’t see much difference between a mid range CPU that is generally good, and a bleeding edge CPU that would cost like 4 times as much.
They might notice a difference in features existing, how much storage it has, how nice the screen looks, and how the software is set up.
1 Like
No, there is no control, since it already runs before your OS is running. It may compromise your OS/kernel before the OS is started. Even when some security software (e.g. anti virus) detects there is something wrong with the kernel, you are unable to do something, since you won’t find that the root cause is the security chip. Even if you would do a complete reinstall of the OS, the malware within the security chip would remain.
One more point. Someone said that it is better for sustainability to make a phone last longer than to make easily repairable. The truth is probably that neither the longest lasting nor the most easily repairable one is the best, but a combination of long lasting plus easily repairable (it has to be a multiplication of odds). And that should be even easier to achieve from an engineering point of view.
So it would be good if someone (at fairphone?) would have a look at that angle before the next device. They might also use that for marketing.
This is unfortunately not achievable by Fairphone, since they still have to go for the common user and the common user wants a paper thin phone…