Android
DROID DOES
Welcome to the droidymcdroidface-iest, Lemmyest (Lemmiest), test, bestest, phoniest, pluckiest, snarkiest, and spiciest Android community on Lemmy (Do not respond)! Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules
1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.
2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.
4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.
5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.
6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.
7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.
8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.
Community Resources:
We are Android girls*,
In our Lemmy.world.
The back is plastic,
It's fantastic.
*Well, not just girls: people of all gender identities are welcomed here.
Our Partner Communities:
view the rest of the comments
I think the idea is that Linus is a hypocrite.
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 but a conflict of interest. One that does not exist with phones.
K simp
Hmm, you make a convincing rebuttal.
You are responding. Just doing a bad job.
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.