I would also want a secure element in the new fairphone. It’s one of the reasons why I’m even thinking of getting a Pixel.
Other than that, I would also like if a mini & cheaper version would be introduced (including a secure element).
A better camera would be another point of improvement for me, but I’d rather see software optimization rather than just a simple hardware upgrade. I’m sure the hardware is more than capable in the current phones, but the software is limiting us.
I don’t care much about artificial spec upgrades such as >=8GB RAM that I’d never use. 4GB is enough for the next years in my case. Same for any other spec upgrades that are just purely an increase in numbers (and cost). Would also be great to have an open source CPU rather than Qualcomm or alternative, but that’s just far fetched
Hello folks,
I vote for definitely smaller version. I recently updated my sony x compact with 4.6" display to a fairphone 3+ with a 5.65" screen.
The reason I did not buy newer fairphone is the big screen!!! (and missing headphone jack). The 5.65 is already to big for my hand. A FP 6S or so with a 5" screen would be nice! And also always bigger means always more material usage. So in sense of eco friendly (and thats a point of fairphones idea) it is not logical to go bigger and bigger.
If you keep the form factor from the prior generation perhaps reusing some modules (cameras) would be nice. So you can buy a “bare bone” version and reuse some older modules you have.
I am holding on small phones since a couple of years now, and I know about Fairphone since the very first iteration.
Initially, I was holding back on a buy for the general quality of the phone, which is solved now. Especially with the glorious OLED screen and other nice improvements on the 5.
The huge size, combined with a relatively heavy weight, still stops me from committing.
I suggest to cooperate with Sony, as they have their Xperia 10 lineup, that could be released in a partnership, in my imagination.
My last two phones were the Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite and the Sony Xperia 10 Mark III.
And a smartphone with similar dimensions, battery life and OLED screen could make it for me.
The Titan M is great, but basically all Android phones have a trusted execution environment, Fairphone as well, including the FP4 and FP5 (maybe the older models as well). FP uses the ARM TrustZone.
I haven’t heard of any other parties that build and sell such a chip though, so I doubt we’ll see something like this on a Fairphone in the near future. Still I wish for next Fairphones to be designed with the best possible security features, because so far security doesn’t seem to have been a priority.
Can you be more specific about what you actually want? Because “more security” can be anything. As far as that article explains, Titan M indeed is using ARM TrustZone, with the ability to do Tensor operations. So that means it will utilize the TEE for local AI processing. Fairphone isn’t doing the heavy AI processing that Google Pixels do. So unless you want that AI magic, there would be no need to develop a Fairphone TEE. ARM TrustZone is already really good.
IMHO the only thing FP should improve are more regular updates and something like FIPS 140.
I’m not sure what this has to do with AI… I’m talking about security features like the Titan M chip.
What I would like, is to either have GrapheneOS on a Fairphone, or at least for FP’s security to approach the level of a Pixel device. According to the GrapheneOS developers the current Fairphones don’t qualify because of late and incomplete security patches (Fairphone seems to be working to improve this already), and hardware limitations like not having a secure element. Graphene’s objections to the Fairphone 4 are listed here: 8y security updates on FairPhone 5, will the devs consider porting GrapheneOS? - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
I don’t know what other missing security features they refer to, but they keep a list of their requirements.
The AI thing is mentioned in the article you shared, the Tensor offloading is what makes the Titan M special. Or did I read that wrong?
Not sure what Graphene means. The bootloader is locked and prevents any tempering with the ROM. And ARM TrustZone is good enough, since its an industry standard TEE. They do have a point about the security updates though.
I would love to see a better camera. This phone is a really good one for me but I have some issues when traveling. When I switched from Samsung s22 ultra I just noticed a bit drop in the quality of the camera. Don’t get me wrong Fairphone 5 camera is good but it should be treated as a core update in Fairphone 6. I even don’t mind paying more and have 2 options as Faiphone 6 and a Fairphone 6 (pro/ultra etc)
Would it not be possible to have batteries and other parts that are usable across different models? Look at the auto industry The battery from a 2001 Dodge fits a 2011 and a 2021 model it also fits other makes of cars. Would this not be more, sustainable, enviromental friendly, and cut down on the Green washing?
It is possible, as the German Company Shiftphones shows…I dont think if not done it has anything to do with greenwashing though. More enviromental friendly, why? The Battery still need to be produced. The real plus I see is, that you can have long term contracts for higher amounts which means you might find better contract partner. If an older model will run longer therfore, I dont think so, the batteries so far havent been the bottleneck.
Also I think each battery for each new FP was improved so the current is more sustainable than the FP3 one.
I was just noticing how nearly identical in size, weight, specs, component performance, and battery life the Reno 10X Zoom I use as my point-and-shoot and the Realme X2 Pro that I’ve been daily driving since 2021 are to the Fairphone 5.
It’s almost like this $550 pair of phones are the non-endomodular cousins of the Fairphone 5!
Besides infinitely better repairability-modularity-sustainability, the only major noticeable differences seem to be how the Fairphone 5 features essentially Stock Android with 8 years of support as well as edging out the Reno/Realme when taking photo stills and capturing video (color production, per-pixel clarity, and autofocus performance). Meanwhile the Reno/Realme brothers sport slightly longer battery life, telephoto + pop-up selfie cameras, and a 3.5mm headphone jack.
Definitely compels me to use these for another 3 years before seeing what Fairphone has in-store for the “6+” or “7”
Please let me know if I should share this elsewhere if not appropriately on-topic here
I was looking at a couple of websites that have Fairphone parts. I looks like the battery for the Fairphone 3 is not available any more; but they are for the FP 4. Does that mean that the useful life of a device is determined by the availability of one part? Would it not for more sustainability and less landfill friendly if component dimensions had a norm?
Example: There was a time that you could buy a battery for almost any type of camera in just about any store in any country, they were either button batteries or the A series batteries. Some genius in Marketing decided that every model from every manufacture had to have an exclusive style of packaging for their energy source. Excellent for the companies bottom line, what about the consumers or the environment?
I got interested in the FP on a visit to Germany a couple years ago. I watched a couple TV reports about them on ZDF. For me the selling features were how they claimed they treated their worker in China, fair wages, their claims of “ethically” sourced material and their claims of sustainability.
Maybe it lies in the interpretation of the word sustainable. “relating to, or being a method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged” “Capable of being sustained or maintained.”
When I look at the website from Fairphone at spare parts for Fairphone 3/3+ then I see the battery is on offer.
So why do you think one can’t buy a battery for the Fairphone 3/3+?
Fairphone refuse to ship outside of the EU exception being UK. I have asked. Vireo.de which will ship, have the notice on their cart “Das Produkt “Fairphone 3 und 3+ Original Akku Ersatzbatterie” ist nicht mehr verfügbar”
which translate to “no longer available”, not to, " out of stock". This maybe temporary.
So back to the topic, Why not standardize parts (modules) over different models instead of have different parts for each model?
I’m confident that this was more a side-effect of devices being more energy-hungry than in the past, they should get smaller or at least not bigger and the battery should last for as long as possible. As a result, engineers started designing all of their components in a way that they fit together perfectly well. That doesn’t exclude batteries of course. And while 6 AAA NiMH cells wouldn’t be much bigger than a FP5 battery, no one would accept the battery life that you’d have with them.
Having interchangable parts between FP generations would be cool but would contradict the idea of a smartphone as we know it. Although these phones can be modular (obviously) they are still so much integrated that you don’t have any space to lose.
That’s btw. a huge difference to cars (you brought that comparison earlier) where there’s plenty of space and the battery is far less a part that you’d consider crucial. The comparison would be fair if those cars were electric vehicles where the battery again needs to be more optimized for the particular vehicle to allow for long distances etc.
I know, I worked in electronic engineering both in Canada and Germany. Fortunately not in the consumer branch; but in industrial where you had to design equipment that to be reliable and maintainable for years.
Fairphone never has sold the Fairphone 3/3+ outside of the EU exception being UK. So you can’t blame them for not selling spare parts outside of the EU exception being UK.
I constantly break my fp4’s USB-C port, and my brother’s very new fp5’s is not faring significantly better. Consequently, I propose a damn simple, industry-standard, and incredibly effective solution.
However, this locking method is fundamentally incompatible with almost all mobile devices, because it would necessitate some serious thickness. Consequently, see undermentioned.
Please add the small screw threads on the bottom of the fp6 and your subsequent cases in order to allow me to finally use the locking ability of the cables I own. I hope that your desire to have me purchase replacement ports won’t overcome your evident desire to find methods of reducing part failure rates for the sake of our planet.
