I also found out a few other things that have changed:

• They now use Torx T5 screws
• The backcover and battery are now fixed with these screws
• The battery uses a dedicated connector
• Parts of the backcover now require a pick
• SIM/SD now sit at the bottom in a dedicated slot and don’t require the removal of the backcover.
• The volume buttons got replaced by the “moments” button and are now on the left

IMHO this is kind of a downgrade in repairability as you now need custom tools (not everyone has a T5 screwdriver at home). Moving the volume buttons to the other side is also kind of weird and unexpected as most (non Apple) phones have them on the right…

Why does The Fairphone (Gen. 6) use USB-2?

In order to make the device more affordable, we explored how we could best balance our spec choices with the least possible impact on user experience. Going from USB-3 to USB-2 was one of them.

https://support.fairphone.com/hc/en-us/articles/24463093338898-The-Fairphone-Gen-6-FAQ

I just checked my phone and the up/down speed for files is roughly 40MB/s despite having a USB 3 connection.

USB 2 has a max. transfer rate (under optimal conditions) of 60MB/s, so I think when the phone storage improves a bit or the cable is a bit longer it will likely become a bottleneck.

Also note that there are other applications than transfering files which might need more bandwidth.

To be fair it really doesn’t make much of a difference but USB 3 is now the standard for a century and has been around since 2008 so I somewhere expect a 600€ phone to also have it.

Compared to the Fairphone 5 it has some improvements but also a few downsides:

Pro:

• It’s a bit smaller (~4mm) and lighter (~20g)
• Slightly better camera (future tests will tell how much better)
• 120 Hz display
• More RAM and storage (although I feel that the previous 6GB/128GB option was also sufficient for most users)
• WiFi 6E Tri-Band (however you will likely never need this speed)
• Bluetooth 5.4
• Slightly larger battery

Con:

• Backpanel now requires a screwdriver
• Display has less resolution/PPI
• Performance of processor will likely be nearly identical to predecessor (however it’s more efficient and modern)
• Downgrade to USB 2
• 600€

My conclusion: Overall the improvements are ok, however just releasing the Fairphone 5 with a newer SoC might have been the better/more cost effective choice. Sacrificing display resolution for 120 Hz feels also quite wrong. 600€ is very pricy for a phone like this. Cutting some premium features away like the 120 Hz display or a bit of RAM and storage (that you can extend anyway with an SD card) might have saved enough to get the launch price down to somewhere near 500€ which would make it accessible for a wider audience.

Have you had a look at your BIOS into the “Fan step up/down time” options?

A yes, a public dns resolver funded by taxpayers money and nothing of it is open source…

Sounds like a massive waste of money to me. Just give someone like Mullvad (they already have a DNS service that is open source) that money instead of trying to be another shitty DNS Resolver.

Also the company behind this looks incredibly scummy and their products are mostly buzzword-bullshit. The whole company is based on selling a DNS blocklist for as much money as possible.

Also: https://www.whalebone.io/aura-for-consumers

People want to be safe online. They are even willing to pay for it. They just want their telco to offer them a smooth way to get there. Common cybersecurity products struggle with low adoption rates due to the need for downloads. Whalebone Aura requires no installation or updates and activates with a single click.

That’s sounds a lot like the ISP is implementing some kind of deep network inspection “to protect you from the internet”… aka censoring.

Check that “Filter lists > Privacy > Block outsider intrusion into LAN” is enabled and you should be fine

You can already do that:

Get-AppxPackage "Microsoft.XboxApp" | Remove-AppxPackage
Get-AppxPackage "Microsoft.XboxIdentityProvider" | Remove-AppxPackage -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
Get-AppxPackage "Microsoft.XboxSpeechToTextOverlay" | Remove-AppxPackage
Get-AppxPackage "Microsoft.XboxGameOverlay" | Remove-AppxPackage
Get-AppxPackage "Microsoft.XboxGamingOverlay" | Remove-AppxPackage
Get-AppxPackage "Microsoft.Xbox.TCUI" | Remove-AppxPackage
Set-ItemProperty -Path "HKCU:\Software\Microsoft\GameBar" -Name "AutoGameModeEnabled" -Type DWord -Value 0
Set-ItemProperty -Path "HKCU:\System\GameConfigStore" -Name "GameDVR_Enabled" -Type DWord -Value 0
If (!(Test-Path "HKLM:\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\GameDVR")) {
	New-Item -Path "HKLM:\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\GameDVR" | Out-Null
}
Set-ItemProperty -Path "HKLM:\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\GameDVR" -Name "AllowGameDVR" -Type DWord -Value 0

You’re welcome

That GitHub comment makes my brain hurt and gives me Microsoft community forum advisor (run ChEcKDiSK tO mAYbe fIX tHe ProBLem) and “leave the multi-billion dollar company alone” vibes.

Also it’s not a single line - when looking at the source file - and a complete section instead.

GitHub Copilot, as used in the documentation here, is free and integrated into the IDE.

1. It’s inside the dotnet Docs. dotnet has nothing to do with an IDE. You can code/run dotnet code in any editor or terminal if you like.
2. This person assumes that Visual Studio is the only IDE for dotnet. Looks like they never heard of Rider or VS Code or anything else.

I do not think that you can call it an ad if it is for a free tool.

WTF is he defining as an ad? “Advertising is the practice and techniques employed to bring attention to a product or service”. The whole section is bascially “Hey you can use Copilot to do this” - that’s an ad right there.

Even if you interpret this as encouraging users to pay

Makes no sense. Does this person think ad = you have to pay for it???

it is hardly the first time that dotnet documentation guides users towards paid Microsoft products: are we going to start complaining about all pages with references to Azure next?

1. A deployment target is not the same as “AI”
2. If a page/section is not named like “How to deploy example app to Azure” then it shouldn’t contain any reference to Azure. And yes you should complain about such stuff if it exists.

The only part of this I actually object to is that I don’t think that what essentially amounts to ‘prompt an LLM’ belongs in documentation, although at the very least the page does disclose that the output may be erroneous.

That’s basically what the whole issue is about. WTF are you even talking about then? Just shut up and give an upvote.

Overall a totally useless comment.