Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Fairphone 6 is switching to a new design that's even more sustainable

    (www.androidcentral.com)
    401 points Bluestein | 11 comments | 23 Jun 25 15:29 UTC | HN request time: 0.691s | source | bottom
    1. blakeashleyjr ◴[23 Jun 25 21:59 UTC] No.44360605[source]▶
    Dreams:

    >Framework-like upgradability / repairability / modularity

    >Support for GrapheneOS

    >Sold in USA

    replies(2): >>44361352 #>>44361789 #
    2. bramhaag ◴[23 Jun 25 23:40 UTC] No.44361352[source]▶
    GrapheneOS support for Fairphone is unlikely to ever happen. Their hardware is too insecure to satisfy GOS's reasonable requirements [1] and have stated that they aren't interested in improving it [2]. Software is also lacking and they've partnered with Murena [3], who has been slinging shit at GOS [4].

    On a more positive note, due to the AOSP/Pixel drama there now is a real possibility a different major OEM will be supported: https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114711328082841462

    [1] https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

    [2] https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114733211017800480

    [3] https://murena.com/

    [4] https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114235396540176085

    replies(4): >>44361856 #>>44362692 #>>44362712 #>>44364210 #
    3. beeflet ◴[24 Jun 25 00:51 UTC] No.44361789[source]▶
    Their phones are sold in the USA through Murena. I've bought a fairphone 4 through them. It was preloaded with eOS but I loaded calyxOS on it, which is similar to GrapheneOS.

    https://murena.com/products/smartphones/

    It also supports a lot of linux distributions, including UBPorts and postmarketOS.

    I wish that they would just stick with one form factor and do the "framework computer" approach though.

    replies(1): >>44363867 #
    4. beeflet ◴[24 Jun 25 01:00 UTC] No.44361856[source]▶
    I think that secure elements pose a greater disadvantage to the consumer due to vendor lockdown than the advantages in physical security make up for.
    5. ◴[24 Jun 25 03:48 UTC] No.44362692[source]▶
    6. TheCraiggers ◴[24 Jun 25 03:52 UTC] No.44362712[source]▶
    That's excellent news that they're partnering with an OEM to make something. Here's hoping it's someone like Framework that has sustainability in mind as well.
    replies(1): >>44363013 #
    7. noisy_boy ◴[24 Jun 25 05:11 UTC] No.44363013{3}[source]▶
    Why not Framework themselves? By now, they have brand recognition to certain extent and a ready customer base - I think a Framework phone with choices of GrapheneOS or LineageOS or standard Googleized option could be a very compelling product.

    That is if they can sort out their availability gaps.

    replies(1): >>44363149 #
    8. UnreachableCode ◴[24 Jun 25 05:44 UTC] No.44363149{4}[source]▶
    Massive cost.
    9. chappi42 ◴[24 Jun 25 08:03 UTC] No.44363867[source]▶
    calyxOS is _not_ similar to GrapheneOS
    replies(1): >>44365640 #
    10. 8K832d7tNmiQ ◴[24 Jun 25 09:10 UTC] No.44364210[source]▶
    > On a more positive note, due to the AOSP/Pixel drama there now is a real possibility a different major OEM will be supported

    I really do not know which other major OEM other than exynos-based samsung that comes near GOS' checklist, but here I am hoping if he is talking about Nothing phone.

    11. freeAgent ◴[24 Jun 25 12:51 UTC] No.44365640{3}[source]▶
    It’s similar in some ways, like being de-Googled, more private than Google’s Android OS by default, etc. Both are based on AOSP. They are “similar.”