Rob. S.

I'm sorry to say that while I did have that exact same issue once with an earlier phone (guess it was the BlackBerry PRIV) I couldn't for the life of me recall how I got it fixed. What I remember is that it must have been some kind of setting (so there's probably nothing broken)...

This prototype keyboard (from the video in the manufacturer's February Update), which, rather than a slider, is a separate clamshell design the phone itself somehow has to be attached to, is still missing the kneecaps keycaps. As far as I can see, this is an affordable lower-end phone that exclusively runs Linux. After different experimental versions it will now ship with Plasma Mobile on Manjaro.

I keep being amazed by the clairvoyant abilities of some people to know what some others, complete strangers to them, knew or didn't know. Now it's no more knowing, only feeling? Accusations which are not provable are worthless – and may say more about those who make them than about the accused. That, for once, is a provable fact.

It's not Fxtec who's actually doing the Android versions for their phones, it's the mainboard supplier which is also responsible for sourcing the CPU, IDEA International Development Co., Ltd. in Shenzhen – in cooperation with Fxtec. I would guess it all depends on how much support by IDEA Fxtec will be able to get out of their contract with them.

That's indeed an interesting question. It would also be interesting to know whether hope might still be justified that at least the two or three most severe bugs which remain until now will be fixed. And how frequently and for how long there will be security updates for either Android version...

So what? Miffed because you're not one of the exclusive five anymore, or one of the exclusive one thousand or whatever the original number of devices was they might have had planned to sell through the campaign? Which they very probably kept increasing slowly as they were led to believe they could still get the PCBs with the SD 835? What would you expect, that they throw away an option to sell more phones just because a few people might get somehow offended by it? Sorry, but I really don't get it.

I suppose when they prepared the IndieGogo campaign they didn't expect to still have that substantial backlog of Pro1 devices during the Pro1 X campaign...

At this point, that's probably the best chance to get a device within a reasonable timeframe.

I'm not sure it have been told if they are going to produce any to stock, or only the ones perked for on IGG or pre-ordered on the homepage. I would not be surprised if they are going for a model collecting enough pre-orders, before making any following batch. / but that is my personal guess only of course (got no inside knowledge on the topic). My memory isn't really improving over the years, but I seem to remember that Fxtec did announce in their IndieGogo campaign that the Pro1 X was as an IndieGogo-only item, not to be sold anymore when the campaign was over and all devices manuf

Yes, I do think so after following this forum for 1½ years. Throughout that time I've never seen a case of someone who didn't either get their phone, or, if so requested, a refund. Fxtec are slow in communication and tend to give overly optimistic estimates, but the one thing they are definitely not is being "dishonest".

Before accusing someone of malice, you might consider that people make mistakes. That goes for me, as I indeed misread your statement and didn't see the X, and it goes for Fxtec, too. Beside that, you seem to overlook the fact that the SoCs for the Pro1 X were already ordered, payed for and confirmed, and there were never any more Pro1 X devices planned than those who were sold through IndieGogo.

Afterwards, everyone's wiser. Especially external commentators who didn't have to do the original considering in the first place. When Fxtec presented the Pro1, they explained very well why they chose the SD 835, and while some would have liked an even better SoC, it was never an option. Back then, they simply couldn't get a better SoC for the small quantities they were about to produce, let alone for an acceptable price. It's as simple as that, and the fact that it was "only" an 835 for the Pro1 and that it is "only" a 662 for future Pro1 X batches is part of the price we have to pay to get a

If that's why you came here, you came to the right place! 😉

The PCB supplier is the one who also sources the SoC for the customer, and for the PCB the customer wants. If the PCB supplier can't get more pieces of that SoC, that's it. After all, the customer can hardly source the SoC elsewhere and solder it on the PCBs themselves. Also, when a SoC has been discontinued, it can hardly be expected that anyone could still purchase it just because some other PCB manufacturer might still be lucky to have some in stock. And a tiny company like Fxtec with such small quantities of their single (!) product doesn't have a choice. They can't go to Samsung

There are some small advantages. The perhaps most obvious were already mentioned by Fxtec, even lower battery consumption and support for newer, substantially better cameras (one of which will be be in the phone, too). And there are others, like better hardware video decoding (I think there are two more hardware-supported formats, one of them being H.265).

I do, I clicked the wrong button 😉 And I don't think 25 votes say anything, they're not in the least representative for all those who are waiting for their Pro1 and Pro1 X phones... Also, the decision has been made, I don't think there's anything we can do about it except just commenting it.

I see your point, and I even might offer to pay for the difference, too. Still I guess it would mean additional expenditures for Fxtec to handle those new payments. More importantly, other poeple might not want to pay the difference and would rather go with what Fxtec has announced. Fxtec can hardly do both, which would mean developing two new phones with even lower quantities than one new phone would imply. So they have to decide which way to go, and as it would be worse making people pay who don't want to, they go the cheaper route. Personally, as I said, I don't care for "benchmar

For me it was clear right from the beginning in 2019, even though the original Pro1 already seemed a good offer at the time (and still seems one today, if you ask me), that it couldn't have been anything but a first shot at a great keyboard phone that would bring us over the waiting time until they have their refined and upgraded Pro2 ready 😉

I see. I'm not much updated on that. I'd still rather have those and go forward than this bate and switch from Qualcomm who took the money and then didn't deliver to f(x)tec. Maybe any of those ones would be easier and faster to work with... I just wonder if Qualcomm blocked F(x)tec from using them. Fxtec doesn't just have to prepare a new phone, they also have to calculate their costs... Even if they could use one of the 7xx series of SoCs without needing a complete redesign of the hardware, it wouldn't help them much if the device's production costs would eventually exce

From Fxtec's communications I gather that one of the reasons for the original choice of the SD 835 as "last year's high-end SoC" instead of something that would have been "this year's midrange SoC" back then was that high-end chips get longer manufacturer support, so existing owners may get lucky there. (Two years later, now a recent midrange SoC like the 662 will have a support advantage over the now-old 835.)

Yes, I need that certification. I don't buy a $700 phone just so that I have to carry yet another phone for the important things like communicating with my health insurance. By the way, I voted "Other option", but I really meant "5 months but worse SoC" – it may sound worse, but if someone doesn't buy the Pro1 as a gaming device they won't even notice. I don't care for benchmark figures on paper. I've been using a Moto Z3 Play for 1½ years. It has a SD 636 which is slightly slower than than the 662, both in CPU and GPU, and it's been more than enough for anything I'll do in the fore

If anything is a true statement, this is 😉

Here's a small update. Got the "Chargie" today and the first tests are encouraging. The device seems very much thought through, so far everything works as expected, without much setup at all. The app is well designed and user-friendly. For us geeks, it keeps three hours or so of statistics about what actual charging power is being used to up the charge to the configured limit. If someone insists on quick-charging their phone even though it has a tendency to be detrimental to the battery health the "Chargie" is supposed to preserve, it does that, too, it is even compatible with the non-standard

Not really true; cameras are still increasing pixel count, with currently 60 MP being the maximum for full-frame system cameras... And even 60 MP. And for equally sized prints, they're not worse than those 24 MP cameras. Just like 48 MP smartphones are no worse than 10 or 12 MP smartphones when looking at the results at same sizes, whether on a smartphone display, a computer screen or indeed even a print. Indeed, that's totally true. But the main reason for that is the small sensor size, not the number of pixels...

It won't be outdated, on the contrary, it is a much more recent chip. It's just that now it isn't even a "former high-end" chip, it has been a "midrange" chip right from the start. That said, I've searched the net for benchmarks, and I don't expect to even notice the difference in anything I expect to do with it. Just as the 835, or so it has been reported in reviews, was hardly slower in real-world applications than a current high-end chip like the 865, either. I guess that highly demanding graphics applications (i.e. games) might be the most likely candidates for noticing a differ