(05-11-2020, 01:28 AM)wibble Wrote: (05-10-2020, 05:41 PM)daniel Wrote: (05-10-2020, 03:48 PM)wibble Wrote: but extending the 'fair' part to the software doesn't seem to be a priority for them.
I am lost. What do you mean?
I don't believe it's fair when the phone you've bought has no way to prevent it collecting data about you and your use of it, often without your knowledge, and sending it to someone you don't want to have that data. That behaviour is baked into Google's app infrastructure. The Fairphone 2 had the option to load Fairphone OS (essentially the AOSP port, so partly de-googled) instead of the Android it came with, and enough public information to enable a number of OS ports including LineageOS and ubports. If fairness on the software side was a priority then at the launch of the Fairphone 3 they would at the very least have been able to commit to a Fairphone OS release at some point, even if it wasn't ready just then. Instead they said they were "considering it", hence my conclusion that software fairness is not a priority for them.
Thanks for your reply. Very clear now.
I guess these are two very, very different options.
I don't think Fairphone is not fair because FP3 OS is still under the eyes of google. They care about human rights and protect labor rights. They also claim to protect nature by making a recyclable phone. I don't think it can be said that they are not fair with the software. This is beyond their philosophy. That phone is for user level. Users who want to contribute to a better world, but they might know nothing about software or hardware.
Pinephone is for experts. People who know hardware, software, ... and want to play with it
A Venn diagram would have some intersection, but I don't think they can be compared. They claim different things and have different purposes.
Anyway, I am pretty sure these two projects will merge some day (may be not the companies, but the concepts behind them)
