| ▲ | I_am_tiberius 4 hours ago |
| Everytime I read GrapheneOS news I search for news related to Fairephone. It's such a shame that there's still no official plan for Fairephone to work on requirements for GrapheneOS. The combination of those 2 would be fantastic. It would also open a big new market (I assume) for Fairephone so not sure why there seems no clear sign in that direction at all (to my knowledge). |
|
| ▲ | jasonvorhe 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Everytime I see Fairphone mentioned whenever there's news about GrapheneOS I'm confused as to why people keep on conflating both when they obviously have very different goals. |
| |
| ▲ | Timshel 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | ? Not conflating, just we want a phone with both goals ... | | | |
| ▲ | t0bia_s 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Every time Fairphone release new device I check width size. Still waiting for small device. | | |
| ▲ | topaz0 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I wonder if Meta pays possible manufacturers under the table to keep even size large | | |
| ▲ | armadyl an hour ago | parent [-] | | The overwhelming majority of consumers just prefer larger screens (myself included). People seem to forget that Apple releasing the Mini was them listening to the minority and the sales numbers if it were poor versus the rest of the lineup. And why would Meta even do that? | | |
| ▲ | topaz0 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | - facilitate the infinite scroll - remind you that the phone is in your pocket, to initiate the infinite scroll | | |
| ▲ | preisschild 4 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I find reading ebooks and long texts like wikipedia a lot more enjoyable on my 6.8" AMOLED panel than on the smaller screens i've had before. You can also doomscroll on smaller screens. | |
| ▲ | armadyl 42 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sorry but this is maximum level conspiratorial thinking. Meta probably has some created some incentive for OEMs to make larger screens by way of people liking content consumption but the idea that they’d be paying for that is ridiculous lol. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | andrepd 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think it's obvious that the target audience has a huge overlap... | | |
| ▲ | gpvos 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | HN readers aren't a huge demographic. | | |
| ▲ | foolin 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | A huge overlap in two groups would obviously be at most 100% of the smaller group. | |
| ▲ | SecretDreams 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Is there a huge demographic for grapheneOS and/or fairphone? Let alone one that doesn't overlap with the archetypes that post here? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | saligne 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You should search for the many times where GrapheneOS has stated they won't work with Fairphone |
| |
| ▲ | Telaneo 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's because Fairphone doesn't fulfil GOS's hardware requirements. If Fairphone addresses that, there's no reason for GOS to not support a Fairphone device. | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't understand the issue. If Fairphone wants GOS can't they just compile it themselves with whatever unsupported hardware based security features disabled? Ditto for any given end user. It's not as though we're talking about a device with hardware specs locked behind an NDA and drivers that only support outdated kernel versions. | | |
| ▲ | imkac 19 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes, they can, but they have promoted /e/OS, and they have no ability to develop Android. | |
| ▲ | Telaneo 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Simple. Fairphone doesn't want GOS. Forking GOS and porting it to a new device is a huge and unreasonable ask for an individual user. Even less so when you include the fact that you'll need to keep it up to date. | | |
| ▲ | josephg an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Why? Because of drivers? Don’t they already have Linux drivers for the fairphone? I wonder if fable or astra could wire everything up. | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I understand that bringing AOSP to an unsupported device is a huge endeavor. But fairphone already has the driver situation sorted out. What's the complexity here? (Genuine question, I'd like to correct any misconceptions about the android ecosystem that I have.) |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | NewJazz 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yep. Gos isn't the only mfg in town if you have or want a fairphone. https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_(Gen._6)_(fairp... | | |
| ▲ | armadyl an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I would imagine the cross section of people who seek out GOS but would settle for Postmarket OS is nearly non existent. | |
| ▲ | gruez 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "mfg"? They don't manufacture anything. | | |
| |
| ▲ | mrd3v0 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Given the state of Fairphone hardware, software and business, it is not surprising. | | |
| ▲ | tcoff91 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | For those of us out of the loop, could someone summarize the situation? | | |
| ▲ | bramhaag 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Fairphone has said they don't plan to add a secure element. It can be seen from their current devices that they don't fully keep up with privacy/security backports and lag a year behind on shipping yearly OS releases. They skip over the monthly and quarterly releases entirely. They replaced their own non-GMS Fairphone OS with a dramatically less secure /e/OS option in partnership with Murena. They clearly demonstrate that security and even privacy are not the priorities.
https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114733211017800480 | | |
| ▲ | em-bee 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They replaced their own non-GMS Fairphone OS with a dramatically less secure /e/OS it sounds like they are saying that /e/OS is less secure than fairphone's own OS. with all criticism against /e/OS taken into account, i highly doubt that fairphone would have been able to make their own version of android more secure than /e/OS when they are not even interested in working on that. | |
| ▲ | riedel an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | One of the reasons I haven't switched to Graphene is this kind of drama. I wish there was more middle ground. I don't think the post is in any way constructive and will lead to fairphone to consider adding a secure element. | | |
| ▲ | preisschild a few seconds ago | parent | next [-] | | Imo i think actually naming the problems is a lot more productive than walking around it | |
| ▲ | IlIlI an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't see their post as 'drama' or nonconstructive at all. It's simply a list of well-founded criticisms of Fairphone's extremely lax position on security that is incompatible with Graphene's. If being critiqued for it doesn't lead to them considering adding a secure element, that's a problem on Fairphone's side imo. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | drnick1 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| To be honest the specs of the Fairphone are middling and the device is rather expensive for what you get. The Pixels are a much better value, especially with a series. If you want something truly high end, wait for the Motorola with official GOS support. |
| |
| ▲ | varispeed an hour ago | parent [-] | | Without support of alternative OS Fairphone is basically a landfill. Why would anyone buy this apart from novelty factor. | | |
| ▲ | armadyl an hour ago | parent [-] | | Supporting an alternative OS wouldn’t change the fate of Fairphone, imo. Most people don’t care to move away from the stock version of Android that comes with their phone or iOS. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | sva_ 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Every fairphone I've seen to far the camera was kinda ass. Did it improve? Pixel phones usually have old Samsung sensors which are pretty damn decent. |
| |
| ▲ | emaro 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The sensor of the Fairphone camera is good enough, the software processing is what's lacking. Imo, owner of an FP4. |
|
