• pjhenry1216
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    I despise people repeating comments. How is making the device cheaper, more sustainable, and more reliable greenwashing? I would love anybody who just loves complaining about the headphones jack to explain that. No one else has. I doubt anybody complaining really cares about the environment either. What phone do you currently have?

    • @BlueBockser@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The usual argument is “FP5 bad because no headphone jack, I choose Nokia or Samsung”… I guess if you’re not even trying to have a fair and sustainable supply chain, that’s totally fine.

    • Dynamo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 year ago

      How is removing the jack making the device more sustainable or reliable?

      • pjhenry1216
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        It allowed them to increase the IP rating, allows for simplified manufacturing, and easier maintainability and repairability.

        How is not including it considered greenwashing (I notice you didn’t ask about that, so I assume you know the answer)?

        • Kernal64
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Plenty of electronics have been able to get IP ratings while still having headphone jacks. It’s a trivial part to include as it is practically an ancient bit of tech and doesn’t introduce some kind of massive complexity to the device. Repair is a simple swap of the module. Nothing you’re saying has anything to do with supporting your claim of its removal leading to greater sustainability or reliability. Its materials are no different from the rest of the phone, meaning it’s just as sustainable as the rest of the parts, and it’s not a part that’s prone to failure, meaning it’s just as reliable as the rest.