Asetru
@Asetru@feddit.org
- Comment on The Fairphone 5 price has been dropped to €499. The phone is designed to be the most advanced environmentally friendly smartphone. 1 week ago:
I just explained how they are effectively doing that because a dongle is such a terrible solution that it’s essentially not usable. I can repeat my points, from charging over being pulled out, and add that they are either incompatible with some devices that don’t supply the analogue audio signal over USB (so you’re usually just buying one of those to see if they work, are happy if it does and then annoyed when you need to use it on another device where it doesn’t and boom you’re suddenly left without working headphones despite having one of those stupid dongles) or come with probably the cheapest, suckishest piece of shit DAC some underpaid Chinese procurement jerk could find anywhere on the market, so the audio quality will probably be terrible even when using wired speakers on a fucking dongle.
Is there a law that prohibits me from trying to keep using wired headphones? No, so you’re right there that they’re not technically forcing anyone. But in anything but making it technically impossible, they’re making it as unusable and unlikeable as possible, so effectively, there’s no way around using Bluetooth headphones.
- Comment on The Fairphone 5 price has been dropped to €499. The phone is designed to be the most advanced environmentally friendly smartphone. 1 week ago:
when a better one already existed
Agree with everything, but it’s not just that it existed, it’s that it was also already widely adopted for literal decades. This was an established solution that is now getting replaced with something worse. This isn’t betamax that just lost the adoption race against a competitor.
- Comment on The Fairphone 5 price has been dropped to €499. The phone is designed to be the most advanced environmentally friendly smartphone. 1 week ago:
You keep arguing that people can just use a dongle. I can keep arguing that a dongle solution sucks ass. I have used a dongle and even the way it’s just used sucks because it’s pulled out of the socket with much less force than headphones, so it keeps getting disconnected. If you like it, fine. I don’t and I still think that removing the jack is a dumb decision. This is getting nowhere.
- Comment on The Fairphone 5 price has been dropped to €499. The phone is designed to be the most advanced environmentally friendly smartphone. 1 week ago:
I can’t have them connected to my headphones all the time because I connect headphones to other devices that all have a fucking headphone jack.
- It’s an additional, and to most people superfluous, point for water ingress. Water damage is the most common type of damage in phones.
I’ve had watertight phones with a headphone jack over a decade ago.
- It takes up space which could be utilised otherwise, like with a slightly larger battery or larger speakers or camera modules.
Yes. Anything you add to a phone is a tradeoff. No shit. These points are what is usually used to justify the lack of a jack. But maybe, just maybe, they don’t save as much money as they make with selling wireless headphones and this is just an excuse? Especially the big companies like Apple or Samsung that sell their own peripherals? And this whole thing is just an excuse to sell overpriced gadgets that need to be replaced every few years because of their batteries? Maybe, just maybe, it’d be valid if consumers still had a choice and could pick phones with or without a jack and would have to pay for the luxury of using decent headphones with a few milliamperehours?
- It’s an additional part which needs to be manufactured, stocked, installed and purchased. Extra cost which only benefits a few. This is especially important to Fairphone in particular because they don’t use off-the-shelf components and promise to supply replacement parts pretty much indefinitely. I.e. Fairphone would have to design a custom module and then have that module in stock and manufactured specifically for them for the lifetime of each of their devices. That’s not a trivial expense.
Manufacturing a phone is not a trivial expense. Removing features is a business decision and a headphone jack costs money but doesn’t earn any whereas they can produce more cheaply without one. I get it. It’s just that doing so requires you to buy and use battery powered headphones that are much less sustainable than traditional magnets tied to a cable. How a company that lives off its promise to safe the world jumps on that wagon is a miracle to me. Companies that remove headphones don’t care about audio quality (which is why Sony still produces phones with audio jacks, I guess) or sustainability. Which is odd for a company like fp.
- Comment on Who needs a lawn? 1 week ago:
But there are other people in parks. Why the fuck would I want to deal with their bullshit when I can just have my own park?
- Comment on The Fairphone 5 price has been dropped to €499. The phone is designed to be the most advanced environmentally friendly smartphone. 1 week ago:
USB-C to headphone jack dongles suck. You lose them easily, you can’t charge your phone off they’re connected and off you disconnect your headphones the device still behaves as if they’re plugged in. It’s so much less convenient and on the other hand there’s just no downside to having a dedicated headphone jack, so I still don’t get why they’re no longer including them.
- Comment on Mario Kart Should Cost More - YouTube 2 weeks ago:
Maybe… Hear me out here…
Maybe people just don’t like it and don’t think it’s particularly funny?
- Comment on Tip of my Joystick - Find games by describing it. 2 weeks ago:
In lieu of the innuendo, in the end know, my Nintendo
- Comment on Nintendo is Bringing Us Kicking and Screaming Into the $80 Game Era with the Switch 2 3 weeks ago:
You’re paying double digits for your games?
- Comment on Civilization 7 Outlines Crucial 1.1.1 Update as It Struggles to Compete on Steam Against Civ 6 and Even the 15-Year-Old Civ 5 4 weeks ago:
You should replay it. It is imho the highlight of the series because of a few changes compared to other civ games:
- Focusing on the terraforming and colonisation of alpha Centauri allowed them to have an actual story where you uncovered stuff about the planet and its indigenous lifeforms while you played. It’s from the 90s, so there is no branching storylines, alternative endings or stuff like that, but even after repeated playthroughs it’s nice to have some progression that’s more than a tech tree.
- Having only seven leaders (and having them all in every game, no smaller or larger games) might seem weird and tbh, larger maps feel a bit empty. However, each technology, city improvement or wonder gives you some (well narrated) text bits of one of them, giving them so much more character than the leaders in your average game of civ. The hatred for Miriam has become a meme, which wouldn’t have happened if these characters weren’t extremely well written. Ironically this is imho of of the reasons why the add on didn’t work as well - the few bits that were added for each of the new factions just weren’t enough.
Although there are more differences, like eg a unit design workshop, the game loop feels quite similar to civ. It’s like they took civ 4, polished it and just decided to make it… Dunno, meaningful. And while that’s not per se relevant for in game decisions such as “where to settle” or “what to build”, it just makes the whole experience so much better. It’s still my comfort game that I boot up for another play on my deck every now and then.
- Comment on Civilization 7 Outlines Crucial 1.1.1 Update as It Struggles to Compete on Steam Against Civ 6 and Even the 15-Year-Old Civ 5 4 weeks ago:
Has there even been a Civ release that was great at the start?
Does Alpha Centauri count as a civ game?
- Comment on testtomcels 4 weeks ago:
- Comment on testtomcels 4 weeks ago:
Testtomcels
- Comment on testtomcels 4 weeks ago:
That image has been living in my head rent-free since I first saw it.
- Comment on How North Korea Launders Billions in Stolen Crypto 5 weeks ago:
Et tu brute force
- Comment on Why can't we go back to small phones? 1 month ago:
That was discontinued after two iterations. Was going to switch to ios just for their mini range after years of Android, then saw that they got rid of small phones as well. Like, what would I gain by switching ecosystems if I know that the next phone is still going to be huge?
BTW, I settled for an S24, which is considered “small” now but still way too big, but at least Samsung has a decent one handed mode that doesn’t hide half of your screen line ios or stock android but instead decreases the whole screen to bearable sizes:
Still feels like the damn clown mask meme, where, after years of increasing phone sizes, they now add a stupid software feature to virtually decrease screen size to remain usable.
- Comment on That explains a lot 1 month ago:
That shrinks in a vacuum but grows as other matter gets too close. Matter such as “the earth”. Explain how we’re not fucked if it escapes from its magnetic vacuum suspension because Kevin accidently drops it.
- Comment on That explains a lot 1 month ago:
I’m not saying we shouldn’t do it.
- Comment on That explains a lot 1 month ago:
Yeah.
Then somebody drops it and it just falls down to the planet’s core and eats our fucking world.
- Comment on Romantic 2 months ago:
What episode of interdimensional cable was that again?
- Comment on I miss when you could get a flagship phone that could fit in your hand 2 months ago:
IPhone 5, s10e, s24.
- Comment on I miss when you could get a flagship phone that could fit in your hand 2 months ago:
Bullshit. I have an s24. Before that, I had an s10e.
They both are too big for one handed use, but the s24 even more so.
Before I bought the s24, I even considered to switch to ios after years of Android only, just for their iPhone Mini range. Guess what, they cancelled that.
There are simply no phones by major manufacturers that can be used with one hand.
- Comment on Sonos Plans to Launch Apple TV-Like Streaming Box 2 months ago:
Who’s Analog Jack? And what kind of superpower is that even supposed to be?
- Comment on got one of the last ones for christmas 3 months ago:
- Comment on got one of the last ones for christmas 3 months ago:
So glad I could pick up some discounted stuff as well… Not in this picture: the Stargazer, which is gift wrapped and will be handed over to my son later today. These will serve as presents over the next year or two.
- Comment on FBI recommends coming up with a 'secret word or phrase' to make sure your family know you're you and not some hellish AI copycat 4 months ago:
So, let’s make the formula for concentrated dark matter our secret code.
- Comment on Mars' Leaky Nipple 5 months ago:
As you sound like you know about it: What is that cloud made of? Can’t be water, right? I mean, we have speculated for decades on whether there’s water on Mars, we wouldn’t have done that if there’s a yearly 1000 km trail of water that can be seen from orbit, right?
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 months ago:
“This waste shouldn’t be overly dangerous and the fact that it isn’t doesn’t say how dangerous it is”. Wow. How did you do this?
Here I thought you’re just slow and didn’t read what I wrote so I was already preparing to just explain what I said.
What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the dangers of radioactive waste?
Did you read what I write?
I will rephrase you:
What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the amount of radioactive waste?
This is where I realised you’re just trolling.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 months ago:
What nonsense is this?
Compare gloves that were used once to turn valve on pipe in reactor room to shit from coal in your lungs.
No shit, Sherlock… The reactor room is shielded by the water. Something you had in there once shouldn’t be overly radioactive and the fact that it isn’t doesn’t say anything about the dangers of radioactive waste.
Even most active kind of waste everyone thinks of - spent fuel - consists from about 90% of useful material.
What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the dangers of radioactive waste?
Actually not.
new nuclear power costs about 5 times more than onshore wind power per kWh […]. Nuclear takes 5 to 17 years longer between planning and operation and produces on average 23 times the emissions per unit electricity generated […].
- Comment on I feel you, green guy. 5 months ago:
I can be a backpack while you run
