Linus reviewed (roasted) our phone | Fairphone reacts
youtu.be
I can't believe some of the points Linus made against the Fairphone, especially given he's onboard with the same compromises for the Framework laptop. ðŸ¤
You are viewing a single comment
And?
I think the idea is that Linus is a hypocrite.
One is a phone. One is a laptop.
It does seem to be the thinnest available criticism here.
They are both products focused on being fairer for consumers with upgradable components and better repairability. In terms of this discussion yours is a distinction without a difference.
One is a phone. One is a laptop.
I'm getting Idiocracy vibes from your comment.
Welcome to Fairphone. I love you.
Not even that. It's that his review isn't an objective assessment of the product because he stands to financially benefit from Framework doing well. He's worse than a hypocrite, he's a shill.
I don't understand what one has to do with the other?
One is a laptop, one is a phone, they don't compete with each other.
I'm talking less about the products and more about Linus's reviewing practices. We saw this in the watercooler debacle. He half-asses reviews and blames the product when he's the one messing up.
If you want to say he is not always a good reviewer, that's a fair position, but not what we're discussing. We're discussing an alleged conflict of interest.
They both have the same goal of reperability and the same shortcoming (being way more pricy than competitors with the same performances). Buy one gets roasted and not the other.
One has to make significantly more compromises than the other due to the form factor. Again, these are not comparable devices.
He reviewed the framework. He invests in it. That makes him bought and paid for. He doesn't become a new person each time he reviews a product, his history exists regardless
LOL no it doesn't?
You don't have to "become a new person" to understand that this product does not compete with the one he invested in. If there was another laptop reviewed that was the same repairable/upgradeable ethos you might have a point.
You don't seem to understand the concept that if a source is biased, then they can be unreliable in areas outside of their known bias. It's not hard though, really.
You don't seem to understand that no one doesn't have a bias. Or that the supposed issue at hand is not bias at all but a conflict of interest. One that does not exist with phones.
K simp
Hmm, you make a convincing rebuttal.