I’m going to be perfectly honest with you: from the very first post in this thread, I got the impression that your attitude to this discussion was merely seeking a confirmation of your assertion that “Fairphone isn’t fair”, rather than having an open debate about the pros and cons. I understand that you are critical about the project, and in a world where everyone seems to be stuck in echo chambers I sincerely welcome a critical voice, but the only way to learn from each other and move forward is by challenging both the status quo and your own presumptions.
Now I may be wrong, but so far I don’t really feel that you have studied the 9-page fact sheet that Stefan has posted. It’s marketing material, you’re entitled to be sceptical and dig deeper to study their claims. But if you had done that, I think we would have had a different discussion in this thread. One about what fairness means, and what it means to you.
If I may take the liberty of steering this discussion in that direction, I’m just going to flat out ask you: what is your definition of fair?
See, every smartphone manufacturer has something else on offer, a different mix of costs plus a target profit margin that add up to the total price. Apple and Samsung aim for the high end with specs and looks, Huawei and Wileyfox try and build something cheap for the masses. Fairphone is a little different. The price of the Fairphone 2 is determined not just by its parts (and being on the wrong side of the “economy of scale”), but also by the cost of getting precious metals from mines in conflict-free regions to better guarantee the safety of the miners. Plus the cost of having it manufactured in a factory that offers better working conditions for its employees (like 60 hour working weeks, rather than the more common 80-90, for an above-average wage with an additional fund for training or extra holidays. Not perfect, but better). They provide repairability through a modular design rather than ripping you off at their service stations as soon as your phone falls out of warranty. They strive for less waste by supporting the software of the phone as long as possible, requiring several highly skilled software engineers.
All of these things sound “fair” to me. Although… it’s apparently not 100% fair. Or well, that’s what they claim. Can some things be more fair than others, or is fair/unfair a binary label? The fact that you don’t consider the Fairphone “fair” makes me believe that maybe “fairness” is a subjective matter. It probably is, a 60 hour work-week doesn’t sound fair to someone in the Western world, but how does it sound to the factory workers in China? …Or maybe the phone is fair, but it simply doesn’t meet your demands. Perhaps you do care about the welfare of the people involved in the whole supply chain, but don’t prioritise it as much as the high end specs. Sounds like your definition of fair is heavily influenced by durability. Is it? So… what is fairness to you in the context of a smartphone?
As a… well, turns out not-so-closing remark, I think the conclusion that this phone is not the right choice for you is absolutely fine. The Fairphone as a product isn’t for everyone. It’s not priced competitively with phones with similar specs, because its that very competition that led to such poor working conditions far away. Two years ago it was an upper-mid-range phone, which today isn’t very impressive any more. But it tries to make a difference elsewhere. In the end it’s your choice what you spend your money on…
Oh, and perhaps to clarify a little misconception: Fairphone isn’t out to sell as many phones as possible, because lots of ways that achieve higher sales figures require a concession in sustainability. You know, things like planned obsolescence. This is a very tricky problem that Fairphone has to balance carefully. The market is shooting forward rapidly still, at a pace that two years along the line the product isn’t going to fulfil everyone’s desires any longer. That’s why Fairphone presumably aims for the ``consumer group’’ that is less worried about specs, because those who are would want to upgrade every ~two years anyway until progress in performance stagnates.
This bit is unfortunately technically impossible. Every SoC has a different pinout and different components on board. The chances of being able to create a universal interface for even two different SoCs (excluding the AllWinner A10 and A20, which are pin-compatible, but old, very low-end and not really suitable for smartphones) are close to none. Not to mention that the connections on replaceable modules are less reliable as those on a PCB. If your camera falls off the USB bus because you’ve shaken your phone too vigorously, that’s fine and it’ll reconnect. If your DRAM disappears for a cycle or two, your phone shits itself and reboots. Peripherals can be replaced easily, but for the core (SoC, DRAM, storage) this is infeasible. Double so within the tight size and weight constraints of a smartphone. Perhaps if the market quiets down, SoC designs will stabilise and might start using standard sockets like desktop/laptop CPUs do… but with the current market that’s unlikely to happen. And Fairphone certainly does not have the scale today to make such demands from an SoC vendor.