Links I’m aware of so far:
The “Key Objectives” for "Using open source as a strategy towards longevity"
x https://www.fairphone.com/projects/creating-a-developer-friendly-software-environment/
How “Hi p” was chosen as the OEM, but no details on how the hardware/chipset was chosen:
x https://www.fairphone.com/2015/02/19/the-path-to-finding-our-new-production-partner-hi-p/
The “What operating system (OS) will the Fairphone 2 run? How open is it?” FAQ:
x https://fairphone.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/204642759-What-operating-system-OS-will-the-Fairphone-2-run-How-open-is-it-
None of those answered my questions regarding finding a good chip set to reach the “Using open source as a strategy towards longevity” key objectives. Were other alternatives discussed? What makes the QC chipset a good one? Less blobs, better source code availability? Please let us know!
Just that people understand me correctly, I’m all pro Fairphone. But I want to understand how decisions are made and what drives them. Talking about this will also help making fairer phones because they will last longer and will be more stable … maybe some fixes from here can also go back into Android or other OSs. That would also add to the longevity of other phones!
x Free Software vs Open Source: A lot people here have misconceptions about OSS because there are different “flavors” out there. A current SoC system will never be able to be 100% “free” and I’m currently not looking for this kind of freedom with the fairphone.
x Them against us Open Source on the Fairphone seems to be a “ingroup” vs “outgroup” thing on this board. I have the feeling that some people here think that even discussing this “over and over” would attack the core values of the fairphone project and weaken it.
I don’t think so. It’s true that most people talking about this do often know more about technology and are also often FP1 users, but that doesn’t make us less valuable contributors. We know how it feels not to be able to update ones phone, even if one technically knows that it is very important to get these patches. We don’t want this to happen again with the FP2. That is all. And I still think that QC could deliver enough code to get this done.
I try to explain the whole SoC software problem as carefully as possible here in this thread: