[HN Gopher] Fairphone 6 is switching to a new design that's even...
___________________________________________________________________
Fairphone 6 is switching to a new design that's even more
sustainable
Author : Bluestein
Score : 84 points
Date : 2025-06-23 15:29 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.androidcentral.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.androidcentral.com)
| strangecasts wrote:
| Was lucky enough to get my Fairphone 4 on sale, but I'd happily
| pay full price now - even though the Fairphones are pricey for
| the specs, unless you absolutely need 24 cores etc. I'd say they
| are worth it, knowing the company is at least trying to improve
| the parts supply chain, and knowing you stand a chance of fixing
| the devices yourself (luckily I've only had to replace the USB-C
| port, which was trivial)
|
| About the only thing I'd ding Fairphone on is not communicating
| earlier that they were having trouble getting Android 14 out to
| the FP4s, but the security patches have been consistent.
|
| (Okay I'm also dinging them on getting rid of the headphone jack,
| yes I know it's a lost cause... )
| onli wrote:
| Not really a lost cause in general, there are a bunch of
| regular phones that have a headphone jack. But fairphone seems
| unwilling to listen to all the feedback they are getting
| telling them this is a blocker, so yes, in that way it is a
| lost cause there.
|
| A shame really.
| exabrial wrote:
| +1 for headphone jack. At least they got the MicroSD correct!
| lawn wrote:
| I've been very happy with my Fairphone 4 that I've had for 4
| years now running CalyxOS.
|
| I could probably use it for a few more years but I may upgrade
| to the 6 if the speakers/microphone are better (and to support
| the company).
| bombela wrote:
| The removal of the phone jack is so obviously planned
| obsolescence, it is ironic that this project for sustainability
| follows the trend.
|
| Wired headphones still have better sound quality. Don't need
| charging. Don't break with software update. But because of that
| it means less consumption.
|
| Think about how insane it is that companies can remove the
| phone jack and glue in the battery with the very obvious goal
| of planned obsolescence. And this is legal.
| KingOfCoders wrote:
| After years of a Fairbuds XL (never again!) and Bose QC for
| my Zoom sessions, I've ordered a Sony MDR-7506 because it
| does not need to be charged, and bluetooth doesn't need to be
| reconnected etc. Hurray for headphone jacks.
| jack_pp wrote:
| I don't think it's about planned obsolescence. It's about
| cutting costs and having one less hole water can get in.
|
| Also wired headphones are a very niche market. If you care so
| much there are wireless DACs that can feed your wired
| headphones better than any phone in history.
| winternewt wrote:
| How do they avoid lossy compression?
| emsign wrote:
| By applying Psychoacoustics. Lossy compression is a
| problem long solved.
| meepmorp wrote:
| that's not avoiding lossy compression, that's choosing a
| form that people (hopefully) won't notice
| chaosharmonic wrote:
| My hotter take is that this is the same problem as IR
| blasters, and relative to the old normal -- when device
| makers like LG were specifically advertising how awesome
| their built-in DAC was -- this whole thing could be solved
| in a much more elegant, flexible way if anyone at all would
| just give us a second fucking USB port.
| h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote:
| > It's about cutting costs and having one less hole water
| can get in.
|
| That's a lazy excuse. Every single IP68 rugged phone has a
| headphone jack. And the ones that are more waterproof even
| made for diving with them also have one.
| exabrial wrote:
| ahhh I wish GrapheneOS was supported on these!
| onli wrote:
| CalyxOS support Fairphones. It is a better option anyway, also
| supports bootloader relocking etc.
| dsr_ wrote:
| Is the combination proof against pre-unlock attacks with
| Cellebrite?
|
| (I would like the answer to be yes, and I would like the
| answer to be yes for many more phones and OS combos. I don't
| think it is.)
| godelski wrote:
| They mention the Pixel and I just got to say, I wish someone
| would bring back the fingerprint reader on the back of the phone.
| That was seriously the best solution. Fastest way to unlock your
| phone, because no matter how slow the fingerprint reader is you
| activate it while pulling it out of your pocket. I honestly don't
| get why people like Face ID more (what I currently use). Someone,
| please bring this back
| aidenn0 wrote:
| It's not exactly a flagship phone, but the Unihertz Jelly Max
| has a fingerprint reader on the back.
| smallerfish wrote:
| The problem with Unihertz though is that they lose interest
| in fixing software bugs approximately 5 minutes after
| lauching new phones. And, based on my experience, they tend
| to launch with a lot of bugs.
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| I hate Face ID so much. I hate being asked for my PIN for every
| single little thing I do. I already unlocked my phone, please
| stop asking me. If _I_ grabbed it, YES, I WANT TO DO THE THING!
|
| -Exhausted Apple user also wanting easier authentication
| godelski wrote:
| Or the minute it actually takes to unlock my phone because it
| missed the first one and then asks for my pin and activates
| right before I finish entering my pin
| jcalx wrote:
| My main gripe with fingerprint sensors on the back is that it's
| easy to inadvertently smudge the camera lens when unlocking the
| phone. Some phones have/had fingerprint unlock on the side
| power button which is similarly convenient, although I actually
| don't mind the underscreen sensors that are most common these
| days. I do appreciate being able to sneak a peek at my phone by
| discreetly unlocking it at very oblique angles that aren't
| possible with Face ID.
| godelski wrote:
| That's more a design failure of the camera system, not the
| fingerprint reader. You can have the best of both worlds
| here.
| ZeroWidthJoiner wrote:
| The backside fingerprint reader could even be used as an input
| device on some models for scrolling, or pulling down/up the
| notification bar. Great for scrolling through content or
| swiping through screens without having to cover your display
| for gesture input: https://www.androidauthority.com/miss-rear-
| fingerprint-scann...
| rtaylorgarlock wrote:
| Exactly--this plus the usability original commenter
| communicated made this why I did so much work to keep my
| Pixel 3 alive for so long. I still think about the rear
| fingerprint sensor after a Pixel 3 -> pixel 6 -> S21 Ultra ->
| S24 Ultra journey, and further how much fun i had back in the
| ROM + kernel + modding + undervolting days.
| jerlam wrote:
| Another plus: you could swipe down on the fingerprint reader
| for additional actions, like seeing your notifications.
| stavros wrote:
| I do the same with the sensor being on the lock button, why
| does it have to specifically be the back?
| godelski wrote:
| Hold your phone. Where does your index finger sit?
| stavros wrote:
| Are we talking about holding the phone, or about taking it
| out of my pocket? Because, for the latter, my fingers are
| on the sides, including on the power button.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| The side buttons on my phone are more of an annoyance I
| think. I'm constantly pressing them inadvertently, and
| rarely use them intentionally. The most common thing in
| my Photos folder are accidental screenshots (yes I do go
| back and delete them periodically).
| stavros wrote:
| Me too, but for the purpose of unlocking, they're great.
| That's basically the only thing you can't do accidentally
| with them.
| Findecanor wrote:
| People hold it differently then, I suppose. The
| fingerprint reader on the back of my Pixel 4a never
| worked reliably for unlocking, and was too sensitive for
| scrolling. It scrolled so often when I did not want it
| to, and I could find no setting to turn it off, so I
| eventually put a piece of aluminium tape over it to block
| it.
| godelski wrote:
| Your index finger is on the side? I have pretty big hands
| and long fingers, that's not how I hold my phone. I'm a
| bit weird and do pinky on button, three fingers in back,
| then thumb has ample room to navigate around the bottom
| half
| stavros wrote:
| No, my thumb is on the side, on the power button.
| godelski wrote:
| Well my original question was where your index finger
| was, not your thumb
| stavros wrote:
| The original topic was about unlocking your phone while
| taking it out of your pocket, which is done with the
| thumb.
| totallykvothe wrote:
| Is your thumb the only place you have a fingerprint? I
| used my index finger on my Pixel 2
| stavros wrote:
| On the power button? How was that comfortable for you?
| terribleperson wrote:
| I use my index finger on the rear scanner on the...S9+, I
| think? Works fine.
| stavros wrote:
| Are you guys pulling my leg? The original post said "I
| wish they still made phones with scanners at the back, I
| hate FaceID", and my reply was "if you don't mind side
| scanners, which allow you to do the thing you miss
| (unlocking the phone while taking it out of your pocket),
| they still make those".
| lawn wrote:
| The thumb works well enough with the finger print scanner
| to the side IMHO.
| rustyminnow wrote:
| Who said it has to be on the back? Bro said that's what he
| prefers over Face ID, maybe just has never had one on the
| lock button.
| stavros wrote:
| If it doesn't have to be on the back, he can just buy a
| phone with a fingerprint reader on the side today.
| rustyminnow wrote:
| I see what you mean now. Having owned both kinds (and
| under-screen), I think they still have a point though -
| on the back was (slightly) better and I wish they'd come
| back.
| zevon wrote:
| I would personally rank a traditional iPhone home button
| sensor and the backside sensors on certain Android
| devices as equally great for unlocking while sliding the
| phone out of a pocket and general convenience.
|
| Side button sensors work OK, too but I have _much_ more
| misses on my supposedly more "modern" side button sensor
| phone than I ever had on old Pixels or any old iPhone
| with a home button sensor. I assume this is due to the
| size and general shape of a side button in comparison to
| an iPhone-style home button or old-Pixel-style back
| sensor which are bigger, indented and finger-guiding.
| godelski wrote:
| I have. Better than FaceID and under screen but I still
| prefer on the back. It had other benefits and just felt
| nicer than in the lock button
| nicoburns wrote:
| > Fastest way to unlock your phone, because no matter how slow
| the fingerprint reader is you activate it while pulling it out
| of your pocket.
|
| You can also do this with under-screen fingerprint readers
| which are excellent these days.
| RandomBacon wrote:
| Usually you can't place your finger in the just the rigbt
| spot when blindly frabbing the phone from your pocket.
|
| I loved the rear fingerprint reader on my old Nexus 5X.
| godelski wrote:
| Never worked out quite as well for me. There's no tactile
| feel, which is more important than people give credit for,
| especially when grabbing something without looking.
|
| Plus, as others are pointing out, there's additional benefits
| aceazzameen wrote:
| I have never been able to unlock my under-screen fingerprint
| reader by taking it out of my pocket. This is because the
| reader isn't in a good position when the phone is in my
| pocket. Yes, it's where my thumb is when properly holding my
| phone, but my grip is different when pulling the phone out of
| my pocket. My older phone with the reader on the back had my
| index finger in position before I even attempted to take out
| of my pocket. It was slower at reading my prints, but was
| always unlocked before I looked at the screen.
|
| I'd love to use the old phone for so many reasons, but the
| lack of updates has rendered it useless. No Lineage or
| Graphene for that one either.
| godelski wrote:
| Plus you can feel it on the back which gives you natural
| feedback
| Bluestein wrote:
| Not to mention some models has haptic feedback and
| everything, upon unlock ...
| Bluestein wrote:
| > fingerprint reader on the back of the phone
|
| Seconded, vehemently.-
|
| My humble, tiny, circa-2014 Elephone E1 (RIP) was unsurpassed.-
|
| Me wonders if the "onscreen reader" is not an integration-cost
| cutting measure, as it saves one part?
| mbirth wrote:
| > I honestly don't get why people like Face ID more
|
| Because good luck using that fingerprint sensor while wearing
| gloves, e.g. during garden work, while on a motorcycle ride, or
| in winter.
| layer8 wrote:
| Why not both, though. Touch ID for the 80% of cases where it
| works and then is faster than Face ID, because by the time
| the phone is in front of your face it's already unlocked, and
| Face ID for the remaining cases where Touch ID fails. If you
| can include three cameras, surely you can include two
| biometric sensors.
| Twistyfiasco wrote:
| The backup unlock is the watch.
| snapplebobapple wrote:
| Have you tried phones with it on the power button? That was the
| best for me by far.
| guappa wrote:
| Yeah it's great! I want to put off the screen and instantly
| after going off, it reads my finger and goes on again!
|
| Who came up with that idea?
| gertlex wrote:
| I'm sure it's manageable with proper software, as I had no
| such issue back in the day with my Xperia Z5(?) compact.
|
| (That said, I get similarly cranky about various gestures
| that just don't reliably work in some cases. I despair of
| the eventual day they (google in my case) no longer offer
| the 3 button home row on android phones)
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| Asus?
| fennecbutt wrote:
| For all the hate that I give apple (great hardware, terrible
| company, wasted potential) it was extremely smart of them to
| buy PrimeSense. Even Microsoft kinda missed that boat.
| xavdid wrote:
| > I honestly don't get why people like Face ID more
|
| Big +1. Face ID fails _way_ more than Touch ID ever did. I know
| you couldn 't your finger with wet hands or gloves, but that
| didn't come up all that much.
|
| Face ID fails multiple times per day, every day. I can't unlock
| my phone well in bed, while brushing teeth, while it's sitting
| on a table not directly in front of me, if I'm in direct
| sunlight, in a car mount, etc. The only time it's more useful
| is when I'm already using the phone and need to auth for an app
| (bank, 1Password, etc). Then it's seamless. It just doesn't
| make sense as an unlock mechanism, IMO. iPad has the same
| problem - I can't unlock it if it's on the couch next to me
| without picking it up and holding it in front of my face.
|
| Face ID would make a lot of sense on a laptop, which is always
| used in basically ideal conditions for unlocking: straight on
| view, probably inside, always centered on my face.
|
| I'd love Touch ID on a phone's lock button, but that's not an
| option. And I'm worried that if it was an option, it would be
| relegated to the budget phones (like it is on ipads).
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| Why would sunlight make a difference? It uses infra red to
| map your face right?
| xavdid wrote:
| I have no idea, but it's a constant source of frustration.
| Sunglasses also lead to failed reads, which makes a little
| more sense but is just as frustrating. "Here's a new phone.
| It works great except you can't use it quickly if you're
| wearing sunglasses. Sorry!"
| bradyd wrote:
| It works with some sunglasses. Probably related to the
| coating on the lens.
| ZiiS wrote:
| An ultra bright IR source from an unexpected angle?
| mystified5016 wrote:
| Sunlight contains a lot of IR.
| shiomiru wrote:
| > That was seriously the best solution.
|
| I much prefer having it on a _physical_ home button. You can
| still feel a dent, but it takes even less effort to reach for
| it with your thumb.
|
| (Well, I think the Pixel never had a home button, and by now
| it's unfortunately disappeared from other phones too...)
| mulmen wrote:
| > I honestly don't get why people like Face ID more
|
| FaceID works with a case?
| msgodel wrote:
| They should switch to an SOC with mainline Linux support so you
| don't have to throw it out in three years.
| ppseafield wrote:
| Which SoC should they switch to? Google's Pixel phones for
| Android 16's release just updated[0] their kernels to 6.1,
| which means the bleeding edge kernel version for Android phones
| is a release from December 2022. What Qualcomm SoCs are
| supported by this kernel, and how fast are they?
|
| [0] https://www.androidauthority.com/pixel-
| linux-6-1-android-15-...
| msgodel wrote:
| If the drivers were upstreamed it would be supported by the
| latest kernel.org kernel even before release.
|
| AFAIK outside the Pinephone and Liberem 5 no hardware
| manufacturers explicitly target this and only 10 year+ old
| Qualcomm (other vendors such as Freescale tend to behave much
| better) SOCs have open source graphics drivers because the
| SOC vendors themselves often refuse to support their own
| hardware.
|
| Google is able to do this because they build their own SOCs
| (probably because they got tired of being jerked around by
| Qualcomm) but still don't merge their stuff upstream (or at
| least they don't last I checked.)
| charcircuit wrote:
| Android 16 uses the latest LTS branch of Linux which is 6.12.
| jacek wrote:
| > They should switch to an SOC with mainline Linux support so
| you don't have to throw it out in three years.
|
| Starting 20th of June this year (so 3 days ago) every new phone
| released in European Union will need to have software updates
| for at least 5 years from the date of the end of placement on
| the market. This might be the first one released under new
| regulations. Also looking at Fairphone's history it looks like
| they really support their phones for a long time.
| msgodel wrote:
| The problem is that it's not really up to Fairphone. Qualcomm
| and Google have to collaborate to provide the artifacts that
| Fairphone packages and signs for their devices. If for any
| reason they're unable or unwilling to do that there's nothing
| Fairphone can do. (and they have pretty consistently failed
| to do this after just a couple years. In the past it sounds
| like Fairphone has managed to hack around it with varying
| degrees of success.)
|
| This is why using SOCs with poor support and closed drivers
| like this is a terrible idea.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| They intentionally chose a Qualcomm QCM6490 for the FP5 instead
| of the rumoured Snapdragon because Qualcomm will offer longer
| support for that chipset (which is supposed to be used for
| IoT/industrial applications). We don't know what chip is in the
| new one yet, all we have is rumours, but I wouldn't be
| surprised if they pulled the same "Snapdragon but industrial"
| trick here.
|
| Many mainline supported SOCs are unavailable to a company like
| Fairphone, which only produces a tiny amount of phones (less
| than 50k for the latest and greatest model). CPU manufacturers
| aren't going to waste time sending their top-end chips to some
| small company when Samsung can pay more per CPU and can take
| shipping containers full of them. That's also why F(x)tec
| phones come out with such outdated processors. Small companies
| will have to make do with whatever niche products are for sale
| in low quantities.
| tetris11 wrote:
| > Snapdragon 7s Gen 3 GPU: Adreno 810 -
| 895-1050 - 256 shaders CPU cores: 8 -
| 1x2500 (Cortex-A720) - 3x2400 (Cortex-A720) -
| 4x1800 (Cortex-A520)
|
| For anyone wondering, MHz.
| TheCraiggers wrote:
| Still wish I could actually buy one. I know the market for a
| phone like this is probably quite small in the USA, but I'd still
| love having the option.
|
| Fingers are still crossed that the upcoming announcement mentions
| other countries.
| BlackjackCF wrote:
| I heard about Fairphones and really wanted one. I was
| disappointed to find that they have poor support in the US.
| TheCraiggers wrote:
| I think by 'poor' you mean 'none'? Last I knew if you bought
| one in the USA (from eBay, having a friend ship it to you,
| etc) you have zero support from Fairphone. There was actually
| an entry in a FAQ about this.
|
| I can't blame them, I just wish it were different.
| NewJazz wrote:
| Yeah hard to justify a repairable phone when sourcing parts
| for repairs is going to be a major headache :/
| dnautics wrote:
| I (US) have had a fairphone for a year. you can puchase one
| from murena and it works just fine.
| icy wrote:
| Really wish they'd make a 5,5" version of this. Desperately
| holding on to my 13 mini.
| neoromantique wrote:
| Manufactured entirely in China and no headphone jack, that's a
| pass for me.
| guerrilla wrote:
| TINA.
| pkulak wrote:
| I'm curious to know your current phone that passes that test.
| fsflover wrote:
| Librem 5 or Liberty phone?
| Defletter wrote:
| Happens a lot: if the more ethical choice isn't perfect, I
| might as well stick with the very unethical choices.
| pkulak wrote:
| Man, would I ever love to buy one of these. But last I checked,
| even if you import to the USA, you won't have most of the bands
| you need. :(
| Spunkie wrote:
| Still no headphone jack makes this a nonstarter, lame.
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| How often are you listening to music on your phone while it's
| charging? (because otherwise you can always just attach an
| adapter onto your headphones to make it USB-C). Seems like a
| weird hang up.
| GoatInGrey wrote:
| So when I reach the trailhead and realize that my dongle is
| back at home, I can still use my headphones to listen to a
| podcast as I hike.
|
| Or maybe I'm out in public with others and want them to
| listen to something but my dongle is at home so I now need to
| play audio over the speakers in a public setting.
|
| It comes down to having choice and not being funnelled into
| overpriced wireless earbuds. Which Fairphone began selling
| with the release of the Fairphone 4, their first phone
| without the jack.
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| What else are you plugging your headphones into? Again, the
| pitch here is leaving the dongle basically permanently
| attached to the headphones, effectively turning them into a
| set of usb-c wired headphones. I was hesitant about
| abandoning the headphone jack, too, until I realized that
| the higher-end phones I'd effectively locked myself out of
| charge in 10% of the time.
| interloxia wrote:
| Swap the dongle for a pd friendly y cable.
| ElijahLynn wrote:
| Does it have QI2 wireless charging?
|
| article doesn't mention if it does, does not
| 9283409232 wrote:
| My dream phone is a Fairphone running GrapheneOS
| summermusic wrote:
| The GrapheneOS developers had this to say about Fairphone back
| in 2021:
|
| "It's not possible for GrapheneOS to support @Fairphone devices
| because they're far from meeting even the most basic security
| requirements. They haven't come close and it doesn't appear to
| be a priority for them."
|
| I also would love a Fairphone-like device running GrapheneOS,
| but I don't think Fairphone is going to be the company to
| deliver to GrapheneOS's high standards.
|
| Source: https://x.com/grapheneos/status/1448394015242604551
| 9283409232 wrote:
| I remember them saying that. I would've hoped Fairphone would
| up their hardware security standards since then.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| Buying a phone because us sustainable would be better served if
| you did something else in place of it. There is a huge trade off
| between sustainability and the usefulness
| ryukafalz wrote:
| I use a Fairphone 5 and plan to stick with it for a while (after
| all, that's the point!) but this does look very nice.
|
| I do wish they would sell them in the US and had more US band
| support. I got mine on a trip to Europe and it _works_ here, but
| not always consistently. :) That 's probably the one thing that'd
| get me to upgrade and repurpose this one with PostmarketOS.
| cantalopes wrote:
| I love concept but the only thing that's keeping me from buying
| it is that it's too big. They don't make small phones anymore:(
| the last perfect model i had a chanc3 to have was huawei p10- a
| perfect 5.1 display
| guappa wrote:
| unihertz makes small phones!
| blakeashleyjr wrote:
| Dreams:
|
| >Framework-like upgradability / repairability / modularity
|
| >Support for GrapheneOS
|
| >Sold in USA
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-23 23:00 UTC)