HMD's "sustainable" phones don't have software built to last.
  • @schizo@forum.uncomfortable.businessEnglish
    36•3 months ago

    That’s a pretty great Fairphone ad, ngl.

    And yeah, you shouldn’t be buying phones that are going to end up software-obsolete in 2 years. Manufacturers, you should really aim for at least 5, but more is better. You can do it!

    And if you can’t, then maybe your business isn’t sustainable and you should consider something else, like running a lemonade stand or a kissing booth.

    • @4vgj0e@lemmy.worldEnglish
      20•3 months ago

      I wish fairphone could be compatible with GrapheneOS or CalyxOS. So that way I wouldn’t need an unrepairable phone.

      • @noodlejetski@lemm.eeEnglish
        6•3 months ago

        CalyxOS supports two latest Fairphone models, the 4 and the 5. I’ve been running it on my FP4 for the past year and a half.

        • @4vgj0e@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1•3 months ago

          I checked the CalxyOS site, I didn’t even know they had support for it and thought it was limited to Pixel devices. Thanks

  • @jqubed@lemmy.worldEnglish
    24•3 months ago

    TL;DR: Repairable, but no long-term OS support and not easy to load an alternative OS on.

    The specifications pages for the HMD Fusion and HMD Skyline explain the phones are only guaranteed to receive two major Android operating system updates and three years of Android OS security patches. There’s no guarantee of a release schedule for security updates on the Skyline, while the Fusion will get two years of monthly updates and quarterly updates for the last year.

    I think it’s a valid criticism. I was a longtime Android user (at least a decade) but my last Android was a Pixel 2 that I bought at launch. That was the first Android phone I’d had that I wasn’t dying to replace after 2 years. I made it to 3 years and then the phone stopped getting security updates, a Qualcomm problem as much as a Google problem at the time. Meanwhile I looked at my stepdaughter using my wife’s old iPhone, which was 6 years old at that point and still receiving updates and still easy enough to take to a local shop for repairs when she would break it. That was my largest reason to make the switch.

    I’m glad to see Google is now promising much longer support on its phones, 6 to 8 years on more recent Pixels, and it seems fairly easy to put an alternate OS on. Other Android brands should really try to follow that lead.

    • moxEnglish
      11•3 months ago

      no long-term OS support

      IMHO, we need well-enforced laws requiring manufacturers to do both of these things:

      • Provide service manuals and reasonably priced parts for a sensible period, much like existing requirements for replacement car parts. (Perhaps 5 or 7 years minimum?)
      • Put into escrow all the information needed for community support of these devices, to be publicly released when the official support period ends. (The easiest way to satisfy this might be in the form of source code, but data sheets and API documentation could suffice if they are reasonably complete.)

      Some people have argued that the second point is impossible because phones are made with components that don’t come with specs or source code themselves. That might be true today, but if large economies start requiring it, then those component manufacturers will either fall into line or lose the market to competitors who do meet the requirements.

      and not easy to load an alternative OS on.

      This is another big one. We need to be able to unlock our bootloaders, install an OS of our choice, and re-lock our bootloaders. (Without permanently disabling any of the hardware features; there must be a way to fully revert to stock.) The only major brand smartphones I know of with a reputation for doing this right are from Google, which is kind of embarrassing.