Skip to content

Fairphone announces the €599 Fairphone 6, with a 6.31" 120Hz LTPO OLED display, a Snapdragon 7s Gen 3 chip, and enhanced modularity with 12 swappable parts

Technology
555 240 58
  • Like I've said before- their market is small enough they should be trying to get everyone they can to buy it.

    That's what they're doing. That's why they remove the headphone jack in favour for a slimmer, lighter phone. Their market research showed that's more important to a bigger portion of their customers.

  • Resorting to insults really?

    3.5mm Aux takes up a shit load of space to connect 4 analog wires. If a phone has Aux it should at the very least be 2.5mm.

    It makes no sense to me why you can't just use an adapter.

    More battery > Redundant analog cable most people don't use anyway.

    I might be a idiot as you say, but the people at Fairphone don't seem to be because they ditched AUX as they should have

    Still an idiot.

  • Doesn't seem to have one.

    But to be honest, most headphone jacks on these slim phones suck and even a cheap USB-c to audio jack dongle is better than the average phone headphone jack.

    The devices from Fiio show that it is still possibile to create a good quality Android device with a good headphone jack, but we might need thicker phones.
    I just use dongles or audio players

    I respect your opinion, but I lived through 90s computing and think dongles died the death they deserve and these phone manufacturers can go to hell for bringing them back or thinking that bluetooth audio is good enough.

    Additionally most of the droids I have bought that have a jack are the perfect thickness in my mind. Weighted enough to stay in my hand and take a couple dozen drops without accident. Plus the headphone jack is used as an antenna and provides radio capabilities so I can listen to local news instead of whatever the tech industry wants to feed me. Which is a nice option.

    • They are expensive. You can get wired earphones for 2 euros that actually work and are reasonably durable. It's not a great loss if they fall in a puddle or if I step on them.
    • They are a lot more failure prone. Half of those I tried didn't work or only half worked, and those that did work didn't last very long.
    • They have shitty range. I can use a 10 meters extension cord with wired earphones if I want to.
    • They require charging. And it's a law of physics that everything that requires charging always run out at the most inconvenient time.
    • Also THEY ALWAYS GET LOST. Wireless earphones, mouse, controllers... it doesn't matter, if it's not attached with a cable they'll just disappear.

    LOL, 10m extension cord. I mean you've already established that you don't give a crap about sound quality with your first point but that's just ridiculous. Not to mention the 10m cord that your dragging around the house.

  • I respect your opinion, but I lived through 90s computing and think dongles died the death they deserve and these phone manufacturers can go to hell for bringing them back or thinking that bluetooth audio is good enough.

    Additionally most of the droids I have bought that have a jack are the perfect thickness in my mind. Weighted enough to stay in my hand and take a couple dozen drops without accident. Plus the headphone jack is used as an antenna and provides radio capabilities so I can listen to local news instead of whatever the tech industry wants to feed me. Which is a nice option.

    It depends on what dongle and for what it is used, for something like headphones or earbuds I just leave my dongle on the cable, the same for in my car. I used a Redmi Note 13 Pro for a while which has an audio jack, but it was TERRIBLE so bad that I bought extra dongles before I switched back to using an iPhone.

    I also already dispise looking for an Android phone, since I have terrible experience with Samsung Phones and Google products and don't want either of those. Having to look for a GOOD audio jack on one is not worth the hassle for me, if it is for you then more kudo's to you.

    Ill just use an old school iPod or a USB-c cable

  • Just out of interest, because I too love the jack, then what are you buying in the future?

    I have no idea, I'm hoping for my F3 to still last a couple of years.
    I'm honestly pretty tired of Android, and that's another can of worms.
    Maybe I'll try with a linux phone, but I'm still undecided.

  • Read through the whole report, sum up all the money they mention. It comes out to $16 000. Double that for the stuff where they don't mention money (because they surely would mention anything that costs more than the things they do mention). Double it again, for a safety margin. Double it again, because we are really generous. Now we are at €128 000. Divide that by the number of devices sold in 2024 and you get $1.24. Now add the $1.20 (Page 29) they pay as a living wage bonus and you arrive at $2.44 per device.

    And now let's be super generous and double that guess again, and you end up with the <€5 per device that I quoted above.

    The picture becomes clearer when you look at what they say about their fair material usage.

    Take for example the FP5 (page 42 & 67). Their top claim here is "Fair materials: 76%", which they then put a disclaimer next to it, that they only mean that 76% of 14 specific focus materials is actually fair. On the detail page (page 67) they specify that actually only 44% of the total weight of the phone is fairly mined, because they just excluded a ton of material from the list of "focus materials" to push up the number.

    The largest part of these materials are actually recycled materials (37% of the 44% "fair" materials). The materials they are recycling are plastics, metals and rare earth elements. That's all materials that are cheaper to recycle than to mine. You'll likely find almost identical amounts of recycled materials in any other phone, because it makes economical sense. It's just cheaper. Since these materials cost nothing extra to Fairphone, we can exclude them from the list, which leaves 1% of actually fair mined material (specifically gold), and 6% of materials that they bought fairwashing credits for.

    Also, the raw materials of phones are dirt cheap compared to the end price. The costly part is not mining the materials, but manufacturing all the components.

    With only 1% of the materials being fairly mined and only 6% being compensated with credits, you can start to see why in total they spend next to nothing on fair mining/fair credits.

    Yeah, I see, thanks a lot for taking the time to read through the report and write this.
    It's fucking sad but honestly thanks for pointing it out, I hadn't even read the report.

  • Ok but what about a headphone jack ?

    Yeah I find a fairphone 3 to be powerful enough so I might just keep repairing it

  • Wirelessly.

    FairPhone doesn't do wireless charging.

    Didn't know that, thanks.

    It's kinda tough sell without wireless for such price, for me. Though I guess it's maybe a tough fit with their modular design ambitions, and corners have to be cut somewhere to keep their higher costs down.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    How well do these connect to Canadian cell phone towers?

  • FP would be a good choice for Graphene.

    many rom developers stated before, that fairphones have a pisspoor security

  • Yeah, I see, thanks a lot for taking the time to read through the report and write this.
    It's fucking sad but honestly thanks for pointing it out, I hadn't even read the report.

    Yeah, it is sad. Turns out, Fairphone is just yet another fairwashing company. People spend lots of money and suffer through using this phone with its trash quality software because they think that they are saving the planet by doing so, and in the end they actually just indirectly donated maybe a few Euros to some random fair credit mill.

    Keep your eyes peeled and read what's beind the marketing, because even companies that look good rarely are.

    Especially for stuff like fair/eco/green, where it's really hard to objectively measure how good something is and where legal standards are ridiculously low.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    headphone jackn't 😞

  • I posted this elsewhere but the tech specs for the Fairphone 6 say the following:

    USB-C 2.0 (OTG capable) can be used to connect USB Sticks/SD-Cards/Audio Amplifier/Network-adapters directly

    I was really looking forward to use this with a pair of display glasses, like the XREAL One Pro, but this seems like the Fairphone 6 might not support display output? That's sad. Especially since the Fairphone 5 had this in their tech specs:

    USB-C 3.0 (OTG capable) can be used to connect USB Sticks/SD-Cards/display (also Android™ desktop mode)/Camera/Audio Amplifier/Network-adapters directly

    But maybe it was not used enough?

    When I read that, it decided me on the phone. I was almost completely certain my FP4 replacement would be the FP6, but the USB downgrade makes it a no-go for me.

    Too bad, because I love the easy repairability.

  • A big problem they have is that they have to rely on Qualcomm for security updates, and the flagship chips simply don't get 8+ years of support. Fairphone uses Qualcomms IOT chips, which come with much longer support.

    Qualcomm will have to change that, what with the EU now mandating a minimum of 5 years of updates after the phone is no longer sold.

    So if Qualcomm expects their SoCs to be on the market for 2-4 years, like they do right now, they will have no choice but to provide updates for 7-9 years.

    I wouldn't be surprised if, given this development, Fairphone turn to the more conventional chips other OEMs use, which would likely also be a win for battery life.

  • Can anyone recommend this? Is the camera any good?

    You can also look at the MKBHD 2024 smartphone camera comparison test with the FP5. I would suggest taking the test yourself if that is still possible.

    I would guess that the camera will be comparable. (Everything below if FP5 assuming about the same performance with the FP6)

    For me, daylight pics were after all of the pixels but before anything else. I like the more neutral not supremely over-saturated over-sharpened/smoothed pictures that many phones take nowadays.

    For me, it was middle of the pack for dimly lit photos.

    For the overall ELO with everyone, FP5 was on the mid-lower end (of a comparison of all flagships + pixel A series), but perfectly usable for people who aren't doing social media as a job.

  • It's 6.3" because of the lack of top/bottom bezels. The phone itself is not much bigger than a Galaxy S7.

    You are genuinely the first person I've seen online who understands screen size != Phone size, because bezels exist and are different sized from phone to phone.

    My current 6.3" screen phone is virtually identical in size to the 4.2" one I had in 2012.

  • What about people who already have a BT headset, or people who are looking to buy their first headset and don't own one yet? You just straight up assume everyone still had a headset with wires lying around and that they somehow never break.

    Having to buy something makes it bad isn't really an argument. The very post you are making right now is made from a devide that has been manufactured at some point in time. If you start reasoning like that its better to start living in the woods with no possessions at all.

    Before BT headsets even existed, all of them were wired and none of them required lithium batteries or chips inside.

    Having to buy something makes it bad isn’t really an argument.

    It costs resources to produce. It is one of the main missions of FP to reduce this by having to not by a new device if your current one breaks. If buying a new one wasn't a problem, why are they trying to make it repairable?

    They are easily repairable and you don’t have to throw them away if the battery goes bad (just replace it).

    You get it.

    If you start reasoning like that its better to start living in the woods with no possessions at all.

    Taking my argument to the extreme naturally makes it absurd. But living in the woods isn't my point.

    If you look at FP's yearly financial statements, you can see how they are struggling. In 2021 and 2022 they were roughly at a breakeven point, turning basically no profit, in 2023 their operating loss was 37% of their net turnover.

    See previous comment:

    I’m saying it is very hypocritical and goes against their brand. If they simply came out and said: Look guys making phones sustainably cost too much, we need to sell higher margin items like dongles, BT earbuds and cases to have enough cashflow to continue manufacturing and R&D.

    Ok, fair enough. I would say.

    But trying to justify and greenwashing the whole ordeal is insulting. The tactic is straight out of Apple’s “Think different” book. Paying more for reduced functionality. Only for them to sell you more accessories for even more money.

  • What features would that include that the phone doesn't already have?
    I'm currently an iPhone user, but I'm looking to move to a more open source alternative.

    better cpu, 2 sim slots, a programmable button cause this dumbass launcher switch is a joke, at least 5000mah battery, at least a sceen mount fingerprint reader or even a working face recognition like in pixel phones.

    a 2 year old motorola phone has all of these for some reason, for only 300 bucks. i can pay 40 bucks for a battery change every 4 years, thats still a better deal to be honest.

  • That's what they're doing. That's why they remove the headphone jack in favour for a slimmer, lighter phone. Their market research showed that's more important to a bigger portion of their customers.

    I've never met someone that cared about a thinner phone, they've been too thin since 2015..

    People that want their ducking hradphine jacks? They are everywhere.

  • Fully remote control your Nissan Leaf (or other modern cars)

    Technology technology
    27
    1
    145 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    29 Aufrufe
    B
    Never buy a tesla, Elon and any employee can just watch you, hell if they really wanted they could drive you into on coming traffic for the fun of it. Majority of those accidents were not.
  • Uber, Lyft oppose some bills that aim to prevent assaults during rides

    Technology technology
    12
    94 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    F
    California is not Colorado nor is it federal No shit, did you even read my comment? Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate. People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No. Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”. Here’s just one little but relevant section: Before a person is permitted to act as a driver through use of a transportation network company's digital network, the person shall: Obtain a criminal history record check pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 40-10.1-110 as supplemented by the commission's rules promulgated under section 40-10.1-110 or through a privately administered national criminal history record check, including the national sex offender database; and If a privately administered national criminal history record check is used, provide a copy of the criminal history record check to the transportation network company. A driver shall obtain a criminal history record check in accordance with subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) every five years while serving as a driver. A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: (c) (I) A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: An offense involving fraud, as described in article 5 of title 18, C.R.S.; An offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S.; An offense against property, as described in article 4 of title 18, C.R.S.; or A crime of violence, as described in section 18-1.3-406, C.R.S. A person who has been convicted of a comparable offense to the offenses listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (c) in another state or in the United States shall not serve as a driver. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the criminal history record check for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least five years after the criminal history record check was conducted. A person who has, within the immediately preceding five years, been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to a felony shall not serve as a driver. Before permitting an individual to act as a driver on its digital network, a transportation network company shall obtain and review a driving history research report for the individual. An individual with the following moving violations shall not serve as a driver: More than three moving violations in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver; or A major moving violation in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver, whether committed in this state, another state, or the United States, including vehicular eluding, as described in section 18-9-116.5, C.R.S., reckless driving, as described in section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., and driving under restraint, as described in section 42-2-138, C.R.S. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the driving history research report for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least three years. So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.
  • Trump extends TikTok ban deadline by another 90 days

    Technology technology
    6
    1
    24 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    N
    TikTacos
  • 311 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    S
    Same, especially when searching technical or niche topics. Since there aren't a ton of results specific to the topic, mostly semi-related results will appear in the first page or two of a regular (non-Gemini) Google search, just due to the higher popularity of those webpages compared to the relevant webpages. Even the relevant webpages will have lots of non-relevant or semi-relevant information surrounding the answer I'm looking for. I don't know enough about it to be sure, but Gemini is probably just scraping a handful of websites on the first page, and since most of those are only semi-related, the resulting summary is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out. I also think there's probably something in the code that looks for information that is shared across multiple sources and prioritizing that over something that's only on one particular page (possibly the sole result with the information you need). Then, it phrases the summary as a direct answer to your query, misrepresenting the actual information on the pages they scraped. At least Gemini gives sources, I guess. The thing that gets on my nerves the most is how often I see people quote the summary as proof of something without checking the sources. It was bad before the rollout of Gemini, but at least back then Google was mostly scraping text and presenting it with little modification, along with a direct link to the webpage. Now, it's an LLM generating text phrased as a direct answer to a question (that was also AI-generated from your search query) using AI-summarized data points scraped from multiple webpages. It's obfuscating the source material further, but I also can't help but feel like it exposes a little of the behind-the-scenes fuckery Google has been doing for years before Gemini. How it bastardizes your query by interpreting it into a question, and then prioritizes homogeneous results that agree on the "answer" to your "question". For years they've been doing this to a certain extent, they just didn't share how they interpreted your query.
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 38 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    D
    Not easy but not hard actually really simple if you had the right energy. Just ignore this so I don't scare you.
  • Tech Company Recruiters Sidestep Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    43 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    G
    "Hey ChatGPT, pretend to be an immigration attorney named Soo Park and answer these questions as if you're a criminal dipshit."
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    J
    I deleted the snapchat now.