We are not sustainable. And neither is any other device maker. This industry is full of “feel good” messaging, but generates 50 million metric tons of e-waste each year. We believe there's a better way.
Fairphone’s marketing can be a tad excessive, but I don’t think this is aimed at them. Fairphone and Framework have very similar stances on this issue: Make fewer repairable devices that last longer.
It’s much more likely to be aimed at Apple, since they just had their conference with the usual “here’s a tiny thing we’re doing! We’re saving the world! Now buy the new shiny!” stuff.
I feel like they’re agreeing with them. Fairphone says the most sustainable phone is the one you’ve already got. They do good work with recycled material. But the most sustainable part is ensuring that the devices last and are supported for a long time.
I read the article and I don’t think it’s an attack on Fairphone but rather the current situation at large when it comes to manufacturing products…or that what I’ve interpreted anyways, maybe I missed something?
We are not sustainable. And neither is any other device maker.
Also this statement from Framework feels kinda odd as it seems a bit dismissive of the steps and achievements that the best right-to-repair friendly companies are taking (even Framework itself). Yes the current situation isn’t perfect but shouldn’t we be celebrating the advancement to those who take the best steps?
just seems a bit weird/unfortunate in their position but maybe this is their way of lowering expectations to then over-achieve later on? That would be a strategy that I could see myself taking so maybe? If Nirav Patel’s talking about their own company then that’s totally fair but to make a blanket statement about all companies seems a bit foolhardy. Plus if it was true then no FOSS or right-to-repair company should exist at this point which isn’t the case.
Rereading the first paragraph is a bit confusing as it doesn’t really connect to the second or third when it comes to trying to encouraging other companies to improve:
This industry is full of “feel good” messaging, but generates 50 million metric tons of e-waste each year.
like yes I agree that there are companies like Dell and Nvidia that talk shit and spew lies about making sustainable products but this article doesn’t address how they’re inspiring other companies to do the same.
They’re definitely changing the industry via demonstration of the Framework 16’s popularity so this article (at least the first paragraph) kinda seems useless and I feel like they could’ve left some parts out imo.
The point is that even those right-to-repair efforts don’t get us to true sustainability. They help to reduce e-waste but are not eliminating it. Even if we were able to make every component repairable or replaceable, eventually whatever it is will become “waste.” Being able to replace the battery is great, but a broken battery is not 100% recyclable. You can make the motherboard replaceable, but what do you do with the old motherboards that users are replacing?
Is the opening supposed to sound like an attack on Fairphone?
Fairphone’s marketing can be a tad excessive, but I don’t think this is aimed at them. Fairphone and Framework have very similar stances on this issue: Make fewer repairable devices that last longer.
It’s much more likely to be aimed at Apple, since they just had their conference with the usual “here’s a tiny thing we’re doing! We’re saving the world! Now buy the new shiny!” stuff.
Yeah FW have some major streamlining themselves to do.
They had a giant pile of 11th gen boards they found recently and sold for cheap.
tbh I lost hope in fairphone after they removed the headphone jack to sell Bluetooth shit
I feel like they’re agreeing with them. Fairphone says the most sustainable phone is the one you’ve already got. They do good work with recycled material. But the most sustainable part is ensuring that the devices last and are supported for a long time.
I read the article and I don’t think it’s an attack on Fairphone but rather the current situation at large when it comes to manufacturing products…or that what I’ve interpreted anyways, maybe I missed something?
Also this statement from Framework feels kinda odd as it seems a bit dismissive of the steps and achievements that the best right-to-repair friendly companies are taking (even Framework itself). Yes the current situation isn’t perfect but shouldn’t we be celebrating the advancement to those who take the best steps?
just seems a bit weird/unfortunate in their position
but maybe this is their way of lowering expectations to then over-achieve later on? That would be a strategy that I could see myself taking so maybe?If Nirav Patel’s talking about their own company then that’s totally fair but to make a blanket statement about all companies seems a bit foolhardy. Plus if it was true then no FOSS or right-to-repair company should exist at this point which isn’t the case.Rereading the first paragraph is a bit confusing as it doesn’t really connect to the second or third when it comes to trying to encouraging other companies to improve:
like yes I agree that there are companies like Dell and Nvidia that talk shit and spew lies about making sustainable products but this article doesn’t address how they’re inspiring other companies to do the same.
They’re definitely changing the industry via demonstration of the Framework 16’s popularity so this article (at least the first paragraph) kinda seems useless and I feel like they could’ve left some parts out imo.
thanks for coming to my ted talk
The point is that even those right-to-repair efforts don’t get us to true sustainability. They help to reduce e-waste but are not eliminating it. Even if we were able to make every component repairable or replaceable, eventually whatever it is will become “waste.” Being able to replace the battery is great, but a broken battery is not 100% recyclable. You can make the motherboard replaceable, but what do you do with the old motherboards that users are replacing?
I doubt it, they have pretty similar goals.
Maybe more a response to apples most recent keynote which focused heavily on reaching carbon neutral.
I was under the impression it was a jab at Apple claiming to be net zero by 2030