Fairphone: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Links) |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
*Fairphone scores a middle score on the [[OSE Specifications Score]], about 50% | *Fairphone scores a middle score on the [[OSE Specifications Score]], about 50% | ||
*Main pros: open source software (not completely), fair trade components, longer lifetime, replaceable components. | *Main pros: open source software (not completely), fair trade components, longer lifetime, replaceable components. | ||
*Main cons: closed hardware design, not distributive enterprise, high cost. Low recursion level, such as not using MLCC instead of tantalum to avoid Congo all together. | *Main cons: closed hardware design, not distributive enterprise, high cost. Low recursion level, such as not using MLCC [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13985042] instead of tantalum to avoid Congo all together. | ||
Revision as of 14:10, 17 April 2019
Highlights:
- Fair trade tantalum, tin, gold working directly with certified mines in the Congo, Zaire, and Peru.
- Replaceable parts
- High cost
- Closed hardware
- Open software
Links
- Modular smarphone on Wikipedia - [1]
- Modular libre laptop - EOMA68
- Forksand - libre laptop by Jeff Moe of Lulzbot
OSE Assessment
- Fairphone scores a middle score on the OSE Specifications Score, about 50%
- Main pros: open source software (not completely), fair trade components, longer lifetime, replaceable components.
- Main cons: closed hardware design, not distributive enterprise, high cost. Low recursion level, such as not using MLCC [2] instead of tantalum to avoid Congo all together.