I understand the reasoning well, of course. However, I assume that Fairphone does not outsource the development in order to earn even more profit for the shareholders. It is more likely to be an economic constraint to keep their promise. They don’t see a cent for the FP2, which they still support, but they are still working on it.
And I think the FP-affine audience would be quite understanding, they have deliberately chosen a phone with a slightly different business model. I guess @anon9989719 might have a slightly different view on this, which is obviously OK and many share his view, but for me and many others (not everyone) longevity is an important argument alongside fairer pay for miners and factory workers.
And a certain time of security updates is still more than what most others (apart from Apple and Google(?)) offer. Of course, an unlimited supply of security updates would be desirable.
I think it could pay off in several ways: for FP, because they could better influence in-house development, because they would have to provide less customer support, because they could better afford longer software support economically, and because they would (not to be neglected) get better reviews.
And for users I also see two benefits: on the one hand (hopefully) better quality software and on the other hand also a certain entitlement to better software. If I pay for an update, I can rightly expect decent quality.
At the moment, I don’t advise anyone to buy a Fairphone. For decent software, you have to go to LOS, iodé or CalyxOS, depending on your taste and preferences. That would be OK if, for example, Calyx didn’t keep stressing that they don’t yet know how long they can support FP4. With LOS, it also depends on volunteers who do a good job but can’t/must not necessarily sustain it for several years. So there I have no assurance of having good software permanently either.
In the end, I’m afraid we can stop discussing about this aspect here, because FP would not choose such a model and too few people share my view on this, I guess.
There isn’t that one specific person who buys a Fairphone, people buy them for a multitude of reasons. Even if you would be correct and people chose the company solely based on business model, that doesn’t necessarily mean they understand the need to update their phones and that they should fund something they might not even care about.
A lot of people on this forum care / know about the technical aspects of owning / maintaining a phone, but most people just use them until something breaks, and I completely understand that.
In my opinion, the solution needs to be the other way round. Every manufacturer needs to guarantee a certain timeframe in which their devices get updated.
If everyone has to do it, you can’t cheap out by just not updating your customers devices. That needs to happen for us to reduce e-waste, not essentially sunsetting devices by building a paywall between updates.
I would happily agree, as you can read in my post. Maybe at this point I wasn’t clear enough about this, but I hoped that it would be clear from the rest of my post.
Well, I can agree here, too. But the world is not in a state I would like it to be, which makes this desirable, but unrealistic. And even if someone, say the EU, took an attempt on this, everybody (I think here it is OK to generalize) knows how painfully long things take. (And I say this as someone who works for an authority strongly linked to European institutions (no, not Frontex).)
So, in the meantime, I would prefer another solution.
But anyway, I think we need not dive into this as it is OT, I’m afraid.
Yeah if Fairphone starts charging for updates then I’m out. There is no way I’m paying Fairphone for updates when I can get them for free if I buy a Pixel 6a. At a faster pace, too!
The fact that the Pixel 6a is currently being sold for half of the price of a Fairphone 4 in my local store isn’t exactly winning me any points to be honest.
Understandable for most I imagine as money is a focus of having power, but luckily Fairphone shows another valuable asset, concienciousness in caring, which is inversly proportional to the power of money in the general population ~ not a current viable business model.
And for all the talk, Fairphone is a business. So although not a charity charging for updates does appear to be a crazy idea
To be honest, I have my doubts as to whether it takes 5 full-time employees to support one model…
You have to say that to yourself and then consider whether you really want to believe it.
I don’t care too much about the upgrade from Android 11 to 12. However, I can no longer use corporate resources on my FP4 because the security patch is too old, so I do have an issue with the patching taking too long.
Why are there no rich filantropists that can secure FairPhone sufficient resources to fund a decent software dev/maintenance team?
I’m almost in the same boat due to the security policies enforced in my work profile. However, I prefer them to take their time and focus on a quality release rather than a botched up release.
Best you can do is #contactsupport, then your complain is noted.
the update indicating symbols, for the now fp4 firmware being from back in september 2022, now turned red, as it is older than three months. even three months, or any delay… and this in the fairphone flagship product… is very sad to say at least. firmware updates? security updates? chipset chips and driver updates? in your fairphone4 flagship product? why would any user need those for real. how dare you ask.
Yeah, cannot access my work profile anymore. That together with the complains about call quality from my colleagues. This might be the end for me and my employer will just force me to use a company phone. Which is either a Samsung or iPhone. Not great… For a phone that’s suppose to last… It only took about a year to become a recycle product.
I fully expect there to be more (hopefully regular) updates coming. But I totally agree that not being able to deliver an update for 3 months now does not look good for a device “built to last”. I hope this is only due to very exceptional reasons and will return to the previous 1- to 2-month cycle.
Personally I’ve decided that if there’s a sale on the Pixel 6a before Android 12 is released then I will attempt to flash Calyx and then I will relock the bootloader. If it fails and my phone is bricked I’m buying a Pixel 6a.
I’m already waiting for my 6a to arrive. Went for it instead of a 7 due to small size. In the meanwhile using my S9 for a few days. The camera is night and day, literally. I forgot what a seamlessly working camera is. And that’s on an almost 5 year old phone. So long FP4, and thanks for all the fish.
For what it’s worth, I’ve contacted Fairphone expressing my concerns about this, and included a link to this thread. It really is a serious issue both for reasons of user’s security and for the goodwill of Fairphone customers (and potential customers), but one that could be ameliorated if they just tell us what’s happening.
Hear hear! I’ve been monitoring this thread for a little while. I don’t quite share the sentiment of the discussion personally, as I feel like my FP4 still lets me do everything I want to do with it (not that I don’t understand other people’s disappointment!), but I do feel slightly disappointed about how there’s no updates and no updates about updates.
The monthly Android updates are a way to mitigate security issues, and the fact that we’ve fallen about three months behind is concerning. I can cook up tons of scenario’s for why this is the case, but the only verifiable fact is that the monthly update cadence has been broken. I know that this update schedule hasn’t been a promise, but it’s an anomaly I’m nonetheless unhappy with. By the very least I’d appreciate a bit of an explanation for why we haven’t even seen a “regular” Android 11 update.
@formerFP.Com.Manager@Blaffi can I request you to provide us just with a quick status update? Even just sth along the lines of “we’ve been working hard on X but are having trouble with stability/bug Y/passing conformance testing. We’re doing Z to mitigate” would help calm the nerves a bit, even without the promise of a timeline. I’ve always appreciated an “it’s done when it’s done” attitude to software, I wouldn’t want to use known-problematic systems, so better to release late than half-finished. But openness about the process helps with our attitudes and judgement of the product!
I’d like to think it is because they are putting all the efforts into the A12 for the FP3 and the FP4, not that I care either way. Querying can only slow it all down or rushing people is unhealthy and leads to errors.
Also anyone with a serious concern can contact Fairphone and post the response publicly, rather than have a multitude of public outpouring of misgivings.
It’s a bit sad but maybe no so bad.
It’s a good job there wasn’t a promise of update date.
I’ve always appreciated an “it’s done when it’s done” attitude to software, I wouldn’t want to use known-problematic systems, so better to release late than half-finished. But openness about the process helps with our attitudes and judgement of the product!