Jump to content

Pro1 and Pro1 X design change to use Snapdragon 662, no new devices before August 2021


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, EskeRahn said:

As said earlier these might not be the two real alternatives, I would guess 662 or no Pro1 X at all

It doesn't really matter if it ends with 622 of no Pro1 X at all, this means the end of fxtec. After changing promises with money collected, I don't suppose there will be many who can trust fxtec again. Me not. And since we are only ones who were willing to pay so much for a niche device, fxtec might be finished. They won't find more naive customers, especially when there are still more serious manufacturers. After a series of problems with Pro1, now that's Unihertz Titan which is my daily driver. With a lot of compromises, but the most useful mobile I had ever had. I waited for Pro1 X, but now there's nothing to wait for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 293
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It is sad indeed. But as I see it they had very few alternatives after being swindled. Redesign the Pro1(x) using as much as they can of the existing with the remaining money. Await the m

I think @EskeRahndeserves a Gold Meddal

The line is when they take the money to Las Vegas and blow it on hookers and cocaine. And then they realize they need more money, so they delay shipping in order to solicit more funds, so they can pro

Posted Images

25 minutes ago, spam71 said:

It doesn't really matter if it ends with 622 of no Pro1 X at all, this means the end of fxtec. After changing promises with money collected, I don't suppose there will be many who can trust fxtec again. Me not. And since we are only ones who were willing to pay so much for a niche device, fxtec might be finished. They won't find more naive customers, especially when there are still more serious manufacturers. After a series of problems with Pro1, now that's Unihertz Titan which is my daily driver. With a lot of compromises, but the most useful mobile I had ever had. I waited for Pro1 X, but now there's nothing to wait for.

It is sad indeed, and sure there is a risk of it all collapsing. That is the risk we took when we supported a crowdfunded project.
I for one would rather have the Pro1X I perked for with a 662, than just lost my money.
Even at their best will they would hardly have the cash floating around to refund all, if they already ordered and paid various parts
And even if they technically could use a 730 with the same antennas and shell, would the majority of us be ready to pay more to cover the losses of them being cheated? I think that currently they would be lucky to break even with it delivered with 662

(Also remember that even if they could use the 730, it is almost a year older than the quite new 662)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EskeRahn said:

Please do not overlook the "FURTHER" so August 2021+9 would be about May 2022...

Is that the interpretation it is supposed to have? if so, then I'd change my option.

@Erik Please confirm. If so, I will change the poll above.

1 hour ago, npjohnson said:

QCOM isn't at fault here - they're probably entirely unaware of any of this given they haven't supported the SD835 for years.

It's IdeaLite, the ODM that went back on their word.

The announcement doesn't specify it.

The baiter and switcher is the one F(x)tec hired and not F(x)tec itself. I wonder if it is a Chinese company... This kind of maneuver seems designed to kill small companies!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, brunoais said:

The announcement doesn't specify it.

Well almost "and we were informed last month that it can no longer be purchased from our suppliers"
taken by the letter they are talking suppliers in plural
, so it is unlikely they are referring to Qualcomm directly.
And frankly I doubt a company as huge as Qualcomm would risk its reputation by taking money and not deliver or refund. Bad publicity for trifles (in their book)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems they're currently doing damage control in the Indiegogo comments.

Information so far is the 662 can in fact do HDMI/Ubuntu Touch video output.

...One juicy tidbit seems to be that part of the reason for going with the 662 is:

Quote

This directly translates to using what our manufacturing partner has a license for - the Snapdragon 662. Choosing another CPU that our factory doesn't readily license would require additional capital to acquire licensing and the already mentioned design overheads. It is much more costly for us as a smaller brand to manufacture versus a larger company placing an order of a million devices. It is the premium both us and consumers pay to bring such an exclusive device to the market.

...its the chipset their supplier already has access to, and going with something else would cost extra.

  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, EskeRahn said:

Well almost "and we were informed last month that it can no longer be purchased from our suppliers"
taken by the letter they are talking suppliers in plural
, so it is unlikely they are referring to Qualcomm directly.
And frankly I doubt a company as huge as Qualcomm would risk its reputation by taking money and not deliver or refund. Bad publicity for trifles (in their book)

I have worked on hardware, produced devices and PCB (on far smaller quantities), worked with suppliers and sourced various chipsets and CPUs. The first thing you do is signing an engagement with the supplier of how long the product will be available and that they have to warn you at least 3 months priori any change/revision to the product.

Come'on this kind of thing don't fall from the sky. I'm sorry but between the unprofessional handling of the sourcing here, the always new excuses for delays and the complete lack of communication I'm done with fxtec. I don't trust them anymore.

 

They release a product, get it in stock and maybe I'll consider buying it if I like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AnnieC said:

they couldn't even update the Pro1 frequently even before all this

That's an understatement, stock hasn't seen an update in 6 months....(and the security update is still on 2020 April...)

Like I get that they are outsourcing this part but at this point this is just completely ridiculous and they should look for someone else because whoever was tasked with this clearly doesn't give a damn. (and they probably still take the money from FxTec.....)

Edited by Tsunero
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EskeRahn said:

I for one would rather have the Pro1X I perked for with a 662, than just lost my money.

That would be my approach too.

I am not directly affected for now, as I have my Pro1 and did not order a Pro1-X. However, I do worry that Fxtec may not survive this disaster if people keep freaking out like this.

There is no evidence suggesting Fxtec were a band of crooks. I have not read a single story here where, in the end, anyone did not either finally get their phone or their money back. Theories suggesting Fxtec purposedly spread lies to suck money out of their community really have no grounds, and I suggest people (here and on the Indiegogo forum) think twice before uttering such accusations. 

In my opinion, Fxtec are a company of tech enthusiasts -- they obviously love their product, and I sincerely believe they more than anyone want to make the perfect phone for their customers. Problem is (in my view, again) as much as they excel as engineers, they are lacking competence in PR, marketing, and business relations. So they make (quite a lot of) mistakes in those fields. And being the small start-up they are, they get pushed around by the big boys anyway. 

However they got into this situation, I think they are making the best out of it. They have explained their reasons for choosing the new SoC. Yes, it is disappointing to have to settle for an inferior CPU and GPU. However, I am quite sure all the things I do with my Pro1 could be done with the new Pro1-X and I would not be able to tell the difference. Yes, gamers will probably see lower FPS. But (in my opinion, once more) the Pro1(-X) has always been more of a workhorse than a sportscar.

I'll try to take extra good care of my Pro1 now. But should it die anytime soon (and Fxtec hopefully still be around), I would certainly try to replace it with a 662-Pro1-X. It will still be the only real keyboard smartphone out there ... And that's what I'm after, not some random chipset. 

Please, try to relax a little! 🙂

Edited by claude0001
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not buy an X model since I don't have money to burn and I am perfectly satisfied with the base Pro1 (lack of stock updates aside)...the 835 holds up well but I think the downgrade to 662 will hurt Fxtec in the long run. I understand they have no choice but it doesn't seem like they will ever leave the hole they ended up in at this rate, especially if they keep asking the same price for it too (and it was overpriced to begin with due to how niche it is).

 

Edited by Tsunero
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, claude0001 said:

I'll try to take extra good care of my Pro1 now. But should it die anytime soon (and Fxtec hopefully still be around), I would certainly try to replace it with a 662-Pro1X. It will still be the only real keyboard smartphone out there ... And that's what I am after, not some random chipset. 

I'm totally with you. Sure these guys made some beginners faults and was perhaps easier to cheat than more experienced guys would have been. But I'm absolutely 100% sure these er good guys with no bad intents what so ever.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, lameboyadvance said:

...its the chipset their supplier already has access to, and going with something else would cost extra.

If what they say about their supplier is 100% true I would start by changing supplier and asking compensations from the previous one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you @claude0001 for putting that down to words.

Even if F(x)tec goes with the SD662, I will follow them. All because they have shown to deserve the trust and they are the ones being screwed. I don't want to screw them more than what they already are by canceling my pledge.

I do wish they would explain better the situation they are in. Could it be stress?

Edited by brunoais
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tsunero said:

I did not buy an X model since I don't have money to burn and I am perfectly satisfied with the base Pro1 (lack of stock updates aside)...the 835 holds up well but I think the downgrade to 662 will hurt Fxtec in the long run. I understand they have no choice but it doesn't seem like they will ever leave the hole they ended up in at this rate, especially if they keep asking the same price for it too (and it was overpriced to begin with due to how niche it is).

But can you give an alternative? Remember this is crowdfunding. So if they get cheated, we as the investors in the project get cheated, but these good guys does not just fold, but say, hey we can give you something close for what is left..

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
so I scrolled through the responses from the IGG project owner (FX Technology) and pulled them out into a txt doc to review. it seems like most the responses are just copy/paste of each other but they did confirm that 622 will allow for external display. What I am not getting is the repeated statement that the 622 is better because it is just newer. All that means to me is that the EOL is futher out so hopefully support for the drivers will continue for a longer time period, not that it is better. is there anything that is an advantage other than longer support life?
 

Responses-as-of-11amPST.txt

Edited by DillonM
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This answer from Fxtec onIGG is very weird

"We have only found out in mid-January that the Snapdragon 835 is no longer available for our use - we never denied that it was EOL. Since then, we have been working on finding an alternative that doesn’t significantly affect our production timeline. There are still suppliers who have this chip in stock, but designing our PCB once again with another supplier would require significant, costly efforts."

 

I don't get the link between their supplier and their PCB and why they are tied like that with a bad supplier...

 

2008488074_OperaInstantan_2021-02-11_201448_www.indiegogo_com.thumb.png.6dc0a6b5c3c0fd6eafa40419c10fa2d1.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, flx said:

I don't get the link between their supplier and their PCB and why they are tied like that with a bad supplier...

Without being an expert, I get that their partner manufacturing the PCB relies on an upstream supplier who cannot deliver the 835 anymore, but there is a licence for the 662 instead.

Other PCP manufacturers could still purchase the 835 (from their different upstreams). However Fxtec cannot switch, as they do not own the PCB blueprints. Any new PCB supplier would have to re-design the board from scratch according to Fxtec specs, which they cannot afford.

Edited by claude0001
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, DillonM said:

is there anything that is an advantage other than longer support life?

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).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, flx said:

I don't get the link between their supplier and their PCB and why they are tied like that with a bad supplier

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 and say, hey, we want you to make a couple of phones after our own design. They need to deal with one of the few contract manufacturers which don't flat-out reject such low-volume contracts. And even then the low-volume customer will have the lowest priority a customer can have. As soon as a higher-volume customer needs attention, that's the one who's more important.

Fxtec's contract manufacturer, by the way, is "IDEA international Development Ltd.", and while surely not everything went smoothly with them, it's what we have, and it could be worse. 

Edited by Rob. S.
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello!  I've been following these discussions for a while, but finally signed up.

I have a Z3 that's paid off in August, and the Pro1 will be my next phone.  Really wanted the keyboard Mod, but I think having a full-time keyboard phone is a better solution.  I miss my HTC Pro 2 running XDAndroid back in the day.

As far as the SoC change, My Z3 has an 835, and my son's Z4 has a 675 (which is similar to the 662 in performance).  For the way we use our phones, I've never seen any disadvantage to the Z4.  The Z4 is generally faster at loading apps, such as Pokemon Go.

Also, I'm hoping that some of the chronic problem's I've seen discussed, like the call quality and speakerphone issues, can be fixed during whatever redesign they're doing. 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EskeRahn said:

And even if they technically could use a 730 with the same antennas and shell, would the majority of us be ready to pay more to cover the losses of them being cheated? I think that currently they would be lucky to break even with it delivered with 662

(Also remember that even if they could use the 730, it is almost a year older than the quite new 662)

SD662 (Q1 2020) is almost the same chip than SD665 (Q2 2019). I think that both chips will be supported to same date. Same goes for SD732G (2020 Q3) and SD730G (2019 Q2). So, I don't think that there is difference between SD730G vs SD662 in the life cycle. And there is also SD720G (2020 Q1) which is as old as SD662.

I think that it is all about the cost. Personally I would ditch 48MP camera sensor if that could save some money for SD700 series. But if the SD662 is the only choice then I take it.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, Rob. S. said:

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.)

Even so that Qualcomm would not support SD835 anymore it does not mean that SD835 is totally outdated. SD835 uses Linux kernel 4.4 which has long-term support to February 2022.

Quote

Snapdragon 835 devices are already running on Linux kernel 4.4, so many 2017 flagships shipping today (or say, next week) will benefit from this change.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • EskeRahn changed the title to pro1 x VS pro1 a resumé... SO march delivery date is did not hold either?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms