Two years after the Fairphone 4 and following the release of some audio products like the Fairbuds XL, the Dutch company is back with a new repairable phone: the Fairphone 5. It looks and feels a lot like the Fairphone 4, but it adds choice upgrades across the board, making it the most modular and also most modern-looking repairable phone from the company yet.

The design is largely unchanged compared to the Fairphone 4, but the improvements that the company did make go a long way: The teardrop notch and the LCD screen is finally gone, with an ordinary punch-hole selfie and an OLED taking its place. Otherwise, you’re looking at an aluminum frame, a triangular camera array, and a removable back cover. Here, the company brought back its signature translucent back cover next to two black and blue variants. The dimensions and weight has been reduced ever-so-slightly compared to the predecessor.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 3 years ago (6 children)

Qualcomm QCM6490

No good for free software OSes then :-(

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Can you elaborate on why? Like, I'm not surprised, I just am not involved in this space enough to know why.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Proprietary drivers/firmware. Basically makes it impossible/very hard to develop custom ROMs/operating systems (the lack of openness makes it super hard to extend/modify/verify the software running on these chips).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    The drivers are well separated via HAL so you can absolutely make custom ROMs/OSes without changing those. The Android OS has way more code above the HAL layer than below. You can't however arbitrarily update the Linux kernel, modify the drivers or fix security issues found, beyond the security support window provided by Qualcomm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)
    1. Manufacturers (e.g., Qualcomm, Samsung) won't return your call unless you buy in huge quantities, hundreds of thousands or millions of units.
    2. Lack of documentation.
    3. Information restricted by NDA.
    4. Non-free binaries required for lots of hardware.
    5. Generally lording over the market and exploiting their position, to the degree of anti-competitiveness, and as a consequence artificially extending the rein of non-free software in the mobile domain.
    6. Astonishingly poor quality of engineering.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Are there any better alternatives? The only ones I'm aware of off the top of my head would be Samsung's Exynos, Kirin, and MediaTek. From the little experience I have in the space it always struck me as Qualcomm being the least shitty option, not necessarily the best.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I am so new to this so bear with me. There is Lineage OS for fairphone 4 - does this mean there won't be FOSS ROMs available for the fairphone 5?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Lineage OS, graphene, caylx, yk the stuff you jailbreak a phone for. People are saying this can run Ubuntu touch, and yet other people are saying this will be troublesome for the Android ROM community to develop for. Bear with me, I'm new to the concept and certainly might be wrong about something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    The processer has Linux support though. Isn't it more the device drivers that are the problem?

    If thie phone gets mainline linux support I wil buy it in a heartbeat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago

    The processer has Linux support though.

    I said it's no good for free software OSes, I didn't mention Linux. I'm not sure what you think it means for Linux to support a processor or why you think that's relevant. Linux can be and often is used with non-free OSes.

  • source
  • parent