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
555 240 121
  • C'mon, this is getting childish. No, I don't have headphones while driving, I have an audio input to the car's stereo.

    Then maybe don't make examples of something I never talked about? I think I've been very clear that I'm talking about replacing 3.5mm headphones with a USB-C headphones. I wasn't talking about replacing a 3.5mm in/out cable with some kind of a USB-C in, 3.5mm out cable. Such a cable would have to contain a DAC and if it's going to contain a DAC you might as well buy a USB hub with a 3.5mm out port so you can continue using your 3.5mm in/out cable while you also charge your phone. See how that's a completely different scenario with a completely different solution?

  • You can get a USB-C splitter adapter.

    isn't that against the USB-C standard?

  • You can get good Bluetooth earbuds for under $50 and a USB-C to AUX dongle for under $15.

    The average person is fine with Bluetooth earbuds or an adapter, and audiophiles would not find the inbuilt DAC/amp on a phone to be adequate.

    Maybe I chose the wrong $10 adapter but I notice a big drop in sound quality using that vs Bluetooth, to the point that it's not worth using unless there isn't another option. I'm not really an audiophile, though I can notice the general quality of sound.

  • Fairphone has been a really disappointing experiment in so-called sustainable tech over the years. They keep making new phones instead of continuing to support the old ones, which might be greenwashing. (Whereas if you got a legacy Framework 13, it's still user-repairable and upgradable.) If they wanted to make a non-upgradable device, maybe it would have been wise to make it high-end to futureproof to work until 4G gets phased out. Fairphone still is not making their products available in the U.S., and Murena is a borderline scam company and I am genuinely shocked Fairphone works with them.

    And I've heard their logic with the headphone jack, but I do think AUX is the lesser of two evils as removing it will just lead to more e-waste with broken bluetooth headphones that rarely last as long as good wired ones. Fairphone's own bluetooth accessories have gotten negative reviews for their lower build quality, so Fairbuds are likely not the solution to the headphone jack problem.

    For the simple fact that non-Europeans can buy them directly off the website, I would sooner recommend feature phones from Sunbeam as it also has user-replaceable batteries and you can send it in for repairs. Or just any phone used.

    I've had to swap a lot more cabled headphones out due to cable damage than bluetooth headphones, but i also only use overear headphones, which have enough battery storage for days. Also, there are also overear headsets that are dual-useable with headphone jack or bluetooth (no noise cancelling with jack tho). Also, the issue with the replacement of headphones lies with the producers of headphones w/o changeable power source, not with the phone.

    And regarding availability in the US: i have the suspicion that the average european will be much more inclined to pay the 2-300$ upmark in price just for greener tech than the average american. i'm sure that they would love to sell more phones, but it's not ecological or economical to ship them onto a continent where 80-90% of people would either compare specs only and cannot afford to go for a more sustainable phone or - a predominantly USA thing - who revel in the fact that their choice is not ecological.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Compared to the Fairphone 5 it has some improvements but also a few downsides:

    Pro:

    • It's a bit smaller (~4mm) and lighter (~20g)
    • Slightly better camera (future tests will tell how much better)
    • 120 Hz display
    • More RAM and storage (although I feel that the previous 6GB/128GB option was also sufficient for most users)
    • WiFi 6E Tri-Band (however you will likely never need this speed)
    • Bluetooth 5.4
    • Slightly larger battery

    Con:

    • Backpanel now requires a screwdriver
    • Display has less resolution/PPI
    • Performance of processor will likely be nearly identical to predecessor (however it's more efficient and modern)
    • Downgrade to USB 2
    • 600€

    My conclusion:
    Overall the improvements are ok, however just releasing the Fairphone 5 with a newer SoC might have been the better/more cost effective choice.
    Sacrificing display resolution for 120 Hz feels also quite wrong.
    600€ is very pricy for a phone like this. Cutting some premium features away like the 120 Hz display or a bit of RAM and storage (that you can extend anyway with an SD card) might have saved enough to get the launch price down to somewhere near 500€ which would make it accessible for a wider audience.

  • I've had to swap a lot more cabled headphones out due to cable damage than bluetooth headphones, but i also only use overear headphones, which have enough battery storage for days. Also, there are also overear headsets that are dual-useable with headphone jack or bluetooth (no noise cancelling with jack tho). Also, the issue with the replacement of headphones lies with the producers of headphones w/o changeable power source, not with the phone.

    And regarding availability in the US: i have the suspicion that the average european will be much more inclined to pay the 2-300$ upmark in price just for greener tech than the average american. i'm sure that they would love to sell more phones, but it's not ecological or economical to ship them onto a continent where 80-90% of people would either compare specs only and cannot afford to go for a more sustainable phone or - a predominantly USA thing - who revel in the fact that their choice is not ecological.

    What about headphones with a replaceable cable? Higher quality cables usually last longer aswell

  • What about headphones with a replaceable cable? Higher quality cables usually last longer aswell

    This is what I do and have had vastly better experiences than with Bluetooth.

  • I've had to swap a lot more cabled headphones out due to cable damage than bluetooth headphones, but i also only use overear headphones, which have enough battery storage for days. Also, there are also overear headsets that are dual-useable with headphone jack or bluetooth (no noise cancelling with jack tho). Also, the issue with the replacement of headphones lies with the producers of headphones w/o changeable power source, not with the phone.

    And regarding availability in the US: i have the suspicion that the average european will be much more inclined to pay the 2-300$ upmark in price just for greener tech than the average american. i'm sure that they would love to sell more phones, but it's not ecological or economical to ship them onto a continent where 80-90% of people would either compare specs only and cannot afford to go for a more sustainable phone or - a predominantly USA thing - who revel in the fact that their choice is not ecological.

    I get it, Americans bad. Burger cowboys who drive big trucks and hate nature and worship Trump. It's a less certain market. But environmentalism is split on ideological lines and some of us aren't walking American stereotypes and would really like a sustainable option if we could get one.

    At the very least, they should drop Murena as a partner and find an honest company to distribute instead.

  • I had a phone without before, that one came with a simple cheap passive adapter for USB-C to 3.5mm headset. You lose out on using headphones while charging, but other than that I was never really inconvenienced...

    That means the audio still goes through another DAC, lowering the sound quality, compared to an analog 3.5 jack. Also, who wants to further risk wearing out\vreaking their charge port, jack inputs almost seem like they can't break.

  • You also have to remember to have that adapter with you

    If you need to plug the headphones into the adapter, you can just leave them plugged in after disconnecting from the phone

    This way, the headphones almost become ones with USB-C connectors than auxiliary barrels.

  • 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.

    Thanks for the detailed reply. You saying that "They themselves claim that they don’t spend more than €5 per phone on fair trade or environmental stuff" is a complete lie. It's not a number they're claiming, it's a number you've estimated. And lets be clear: what you've done is take $3k in gold credits plus $13k cobalt credits and multiplied that by an arbitrary 8x.

    I think you've gone into your analysis with a foregone conclusion. There simply isn't enough information to say anything about the cost overheat of being "fair".

    You’ll likely find almost identical amounts of recycled materials in any other phone, because it makes economical sense. It’s just cheaper.

    And yet the FP4 was significantly less recycled. Plastic is certainly not cheaper to recycle; that's a lie the plastic industry's been pushing for a while.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    For real, though, what is it?

  • 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.

    Do you interact with people outside of audiophile circles? I'm not in any, and I haven't heard anyone in person complain about a missing headphone jack in many years, not after a few years of airpods being available. Hell, I don't know anyone who uses wired headphones anymore. I have heard people mention that my phone is too heavy, and I'm using a pixel 9 pro. Before this phone I was using a pixel 5, and I had people telling me my phone was too small/plastic-y. I don't think you have an understanding of "normal people" They aren't tech enthusiasts, they aren't audiophiles, and they are genuinely shocked when I tell them about how egregiously most tech companies are violating their privacy, but are quick to say that they don't care/don't want to give up creature comforts to prevent it.

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

    I have a Sony Xperia that has both a jack and a SD slot. I shelled out for the top of the line one, but since it has good specs I plan on keeping it for many years.

  • Okay, I'm going to ask... why don't you use wireless?

    Edit: some results are in, and the only reasonable answer is better audio quality, although that's probably no longer true. The rest are fairly weak reasons.

    Lol'd at the 10m extension cord though, thanks for that one.

    It's about options. You can still use Bluetooth even with a phone that has a 3.5mm jack. I also run live sound and have used the ability to plug my phone directly into the board for background music multiple times.

  • Battery degradation. Wired earphones/headphones can be BIFL if treated properly. A typical wireless device will see battery degradation within a handful of years, and I have yet to see a decent TWS solution with replaceable batteries.

    The Fairbuds does have a replaceable battery if that's what you are searching for. Sure, the sound won't be as good as a Sony, Bose, or the like, but it would be good enough if your focus is durability instead of perfect sound quality.

  • I’m assuming they are removing the headphone jack cause the internal components take up too much space. I can’t imagine these companies removing the jacks cause they cost too much money.

    You're vastly overestimating the space required for a 3.5mm jack, and the reasons for its removal.

    The jack takes up some internal space, but not much at all. The components required internally like the DAC chip are insignificant. It is a potential source of water ingress, but that can be mitigated and has been done many times before.

    The reason for removal is two fold, first you simply don't have to deal with any of the above, so from an engineering perspective it's always easier to not do something. The second, and most important, **is to sell wireless headphones. **

    You'll notice that Fairphone came out with their own earbuds at the same time they removed the headphone jack. You could of course use Bluetooth headphones with the Fairphone 1, 2, and 3, but you weren't forced to think about it and could just use your existing headphones. Removing the jack ads inconvenience and breaks user habit, causing people to re-evaluate their headphones and consider a new purchase, which the manufacturer just happens to have and likely in a bundle deal.

    Apple, Google, and Samsung have seen huge uplift in earbud sales with the removal of the jack. So the anger of some power users is of no consequence to them. Seeing Fairphone follow in this behaviour what's disappointing.

  • I have a Sony Xperia that has both a jack and a SD slot. I shelled out for the top of the line one, but since it has good specs I plan on keeping it for many years.

    Same, but it's insanely expensive for a good phone with a horrible camera.

  • 1.Wired headphones deliver better audio quality
    2.Wired headphones are harder to lose
    3.Wired headphones don't need batteries, so:
    a)less e-waste
    b)no need to check if they are charged
    4.Wired headphones are more secure, connection cannot be intercepted and phishing attacks with BT are not possible
    5.While wired headphones are plugged, no one can take your phone without you noticing

    Phishing attacks? On a headphone? 🤣

    Wired headphones can be intercepted, as the wires unfortunately also act as an antenna (I'm a computer security technician, we semi-routinely do such interception).

    As for sound quality, it will always be limited by the DAC quality, and there is little way to add a good quality DAC without adding significant weight to the phone. Did you ever wonder why audiophiles audio players looks like bricks? That why.

    But I agree with point 2, 3 and 5, they are valid, but I don't agree with some aspects:

    • You can make some TW headphones bips to find them, which you cannot with wired ones for obvious reasons.
    • The cable is unfortunately often their weakpoints, and I had to throw away multiple of my headphones (which were fairly good quality ones) because of that. That's actually the main reason I went wireless. I was tired of the cable breaking, and it getting in my way.

    Now all my audio equipments are wireless, and I change their batteries every 5 years or so. Unfortunately I bought mines before Fairphone launched theirs, so it wasn't an option, but once any of my headphones eat the dust for good, I'll probably buy an easily repairable one if audio quality and codecs are acceptable (I'm an Audiophile, so that's important to me).

  • Maybe I chose the wrong $10 adapter but I notice a big drop in sound quality using that vs Bluetooth, to the point that it's not worth using unless there isn't another option. I'm not really an audiophile, though I can notice the general quality of sound.

    That's why you don't just buy the cheapest one you see on Amazon. Google/DDG around to know which ones are good.

  • The effects of AI on firms and workers

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    9 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    brobot9000@lemmy.worldB
    Your response is: want to be more productive? Replace the CEO and pointless middle management with Ai! Image how much money the shareholders would save!
  • Biotech uses fermentation to produce milk proteins without cows

    Technology technology
    25
    185 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    F
    Copy of the article because I don’t respect Microsoft: With finite natural resources and a growing demand for food, the world must find ways to overcome this challenge. One proposal comes from a Brazilian startup that will produce milk proteins without the need for cows. Founded in 2023, Future Cow wants to transform the dairy market by using precision fermentation, a process that combines high technology, sustainability, and production efficiency. "Our mission is to make milk without a cow," summarizes Leonardo Vieira, the company's co-founder and CEO. "Precision fermentation is a technology similar to that used in the production of beer or wine." The entrepreneur explains that the technology involves identifying the genetic sequence in the animal's DNA that provides instructions for producing the milk protein. The sequence is then copied and encoded in a host, which can be a fungus, yeast, or bacterium. The host then multiplies in a fermentation tank with a calorie source for nutrition. The result is a liquid that—after being filtered and dried—is transformed into the initially programmed milk proteins. "These proteins serve as ingredients for the food and dairy industry, which can recombine the product to create various derivatives," he explains. The foodtech will use yeast as hosts to initially produce casein and whey protein, two of the main proteins found in milk. Casein is widely used in cheese and yogurt production, while whey is rich in protein and highly valued in the food supplement market. There are also other proteins in milk, each with specific applications. "One of them is lactoferrin, which is extremely difficult to produce using traditional methods," says Vieira. "It takes 10,000 liters of milk to obtain just one kilo of this ingredient." #From the laboratory to the market Future Cow began operating in the Supera Technology Park in Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo state. There, it produced the first grams of milk protein using precision fermentation. It was then selected to take part in the DeepTech Acceleration Program (PACE) of the Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM) in Campinas. It is now testing the scaling of the process, which is a critical stage for biotech companies. "Ninety-five percent of biotechs fail when they leave a bench environment and go to a pilot plant or other relevant environment," recalls Vieira. "We're very optimistic that with the support of the CNPEM and the available infrastructure, we'll achieve the scale-up we need for the next stage." The startup does not intend to replace animal milk entirely; rather, it wants to create complementary solutions for the industry. "When precision fermentation began, it was all very black or white: the product was either animal or it wasn't animal. Now, we see more hybrid models," Vieira observes. According to Vieira, executives from large dairies claim to already purchase all the available milk on the market. "They can't increase production by 20% or 30% with just the traditional raw material," he says. "If they can mix our ingredient with the animal product to create a hybrid product and increase the scale, it'll be a significant gain," he says. Another relevant aspect is the decarbonization agenda of large companies. "Even if precision fermentation doesn't fully replace animal milk, a 10% or 20% reduction in the carbon footprint of large corporations in the food sector would already represent a considerable environmental impact," Vieira continues. #Brazilian potential The sector for alternative proteins produced by precision fermentation is still in its early stages, but startups specializing in the segment are already emerging around the world. "Each one follows a different technological route. There's variation in the type of host [fungus, yeast, or bacteria] and in the target proteins," says Vieira. The entrepreneur points out that Brazil is in a privileged strategic position to lead the global market. "Brazil is the only country in the world that has an abundance of water, sugar, and renewable energy, which are the three essential inputs for fermentation. It's a unique opportunity for the country," he points out. "With these characteristics, Brazil can take the lead in a strategic industry for the future of global food." Future Cow's technical and economic analyses show that producing milk proteins on a 300,000-liter scale will be less expensive than traditional production methods. He points out that when precision fermentation reaches an industrial scale with lower costs, it will disrupt the market: "If Brazil only focuses on traditional agriculture at that point, we'll be left behind." The researcher cites New Zealand as an example. The country has characteristics similar to Brazil's, and a significant portion of its gross domestic product (GDP) comes from milk exports. "They've already realized that the sector is going to change and are moving to avoid being left behind," he comments. "I've been trying to alert the Brazilian government authorities to this potential." #Future prospects Future Cow already has a functional strain and is now looking to increase production yields. "The more the strain produces, the more the unit price falls. So we're optimizing the fermentation processes," Vieira asserts. The expectation is that the product will be ready and available for sale by the end of 2026. Since the product is an ingredient, the company will not sell directly to the end consumer, but rather will act as a supplier to the food industry. This approach could facilitate the startup's entry into the market. Vieira explains, "As an ingredient, our product can be incorporated into existing products without facing a high entry barrier." The startup will initially market the proteins it has already developed before expanding to other varieties. "Only after the first commercialization will we develop other proteins," says the entrepreneur. The company is preparing to take part in VivaTech, an innovation fair that will be held in Paris, France, in June. "The technology already exists in other countries and at VivaTech we'll be able to show that Brazil has it too," says Vieira. "We can win over investors who realize that we can manufacture in Brazil and export to other locations. This kind of exposure abroad is uncommon for Brazilian companies." At the meeting, Future Cow aims to connect with the innovation ecosystem, raise awareness of the development of the technology in Brazil, and attract potential corporate partners. "We want to demonstrate that we're developing alternative proteins and, with this, attract multinationals from the dairy sector to be our clients." #Scientific entrepreneurship One aspect that Vieira highlights is the combination of skills at Future Cow. While he brings experience in business and entrepreneurship, his partner, Rosana Goldbeck, has a Ph.D. in food engineering from the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP) and has already studied meat cultivation in Brazil. He says, "This mix is an important differentiator, as it brings together someone who understands business and someone who understands the technology." According to Vieira, this is one of the main barriers preventing more innovations from Brazilian universities from becoming commercial products: "Brazil produces a lot of science, has many scientific articles, but most of them don't become businesses," he laments. "There need to be more connections between the academic environment and entrepreneurship in Brazil." Provided by FAPESP
  • How to "Reformat" a Hardrive the American way

    Technology technology
    25
    2
    90 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    T
    It really, really is. Like that scene from Office Space.
  • 311 Stimmen
    50 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    T
    The list of previous searches on his iPhone included “Which month is april in islam,” “Festivals happening near me,” “are suicide attacks haram in islam,” “ginger isis member,” “lone wolf terrorists isis,” and “can tou kill a woman who foesnt[sic] wear hijab.” lol of course he’s a fucking idiot
  • The AI girlfriend guy - The Paranoia Of The AI Era

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    7 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    S
    Saying 'don't downvote' is the flammable inflammable conundrum, both don't and do parse as do.
  • My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts

    Technology technology
    31
    1
    13 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    34 Aufrufe
    J
    I did read it, and my comment is exactly referencing the attitude of the author which is "It's good enough, so you should use it". I disagree, and say it's another dumbass shortcut to cash grab on a less than stellar ecosystem and product. It's training wheels for failure.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Dear Brother Printers: Eat a [Sponsor friendly words here]

    Technology technology
    2
    1 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    A
    Why doesn't Amazon just sell a generic printer that works with generic toner or pigment or ink. I would buy.