The actual and best attestation of fears only comes years later when you're looking at pre-owned device market

(18)
Under the requirements laid down in delegated acts adopted pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2024/1781 or implementing measures adopted pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (11), manufacturers are to provide access to spare parts, repair and maintenance information or any repair related software tools, firmware or similar auxiliary means. Those requirements ensure the technical feasibility of repair, not only by the manufacturer, but also by other repairers. As a consequence, the repairers and, where applicable, consumers will have access to spare parts and repair-related information and tools in accordance with Union legal acts and consumers will have a wider choice of repairers or, where applicable, the possibility to repair by themselves. Spare parts should be made available at least for the time period set out in Union legal acts. Manufacturers that make spare parts and tools available for goods covered by legal acts listed in Annex II to this Directive, whether because of corresponding legal obligations under Union law or voluntarily, should charge a reasonable price that does not deter access to such spare parts and tools, thereby preventing repair. To complement those measures, manufacturers should not use any contractual clauses, hardware or software techniques that impede the repair of goods for which there are repairability requirements set out in Union legal acts listed in Annex II to this Directive unless they are justified by legitimate and objective factors, including to prevent or restrict the unauthorised use of works and other subject matters protected by intellectual property rights under Union and national legal acts, in particular Directives 2001/29/EC (12), 2004/48/EC (13) and (EU) 2019/790 (14) of the European Parliament and of the Council. Consequently, this should encourage competition and benefit consumers with better services and lower repair prices.


https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024L1799

Mandatory EDL access for third party service centers in the whole EU? 🤨

Aleph Research in total shambles (post from years ago)

EDL cables are a vulnerability, simply connecting a device to a supposed charging station should never become an entry of device compromise, but access to EDL itself is completely essential to avoid personal data and device loss, not to mention creation of ewaste.

If you're thinking of CMF Phone 2 Pro, remember that Moto Edge 50 Neo literally exists. Take what you want from it. 🙏

Now, what if we had a removable eUICC (a thing that currently has a nano SIM form factor, but functions just like an embedded eSIM chip, for example from 5ber.com or estk.me) that is a microSD Express card at the same time? It'd save physical space as much as possible while not adding another unchangeable identifier to your device like the embedded eSIM chips do.

Btw, if you're not poor, I believe the latter company is currently the best provider of removable eUICCs, both when it comes to feature set and openness. I just wish that this form of hardware will never die, it's sad to see dual eSIM American iPhones with 0 physical slots.

https://github.com/estkme-group

Alternative that should be the same:
https://jmp.chat/esim-adapter

App sideloading on iOS exists so much that you still have to pay for it and/or accept various quirks. There's no painless process without gotchas where a broke OSS dev friend sends you an .ipa they just compiled that you decide to permanently keep installed and nothing particular ever happens afterwards.

Don't ever let big cam guys near the smartphones, they'll come with extravagant terms for the most normal things ever that would be available everywhere due to their simplicity if only the market cared enough.

Tldr: there's an app on iPhone allowing you to record 4:3 video, aka "open gate", because it's the full sensor FoV. This shouldn't ever be special since the concept is trivial to implement and third party Android camera apps offer it since many years. I'd even say more, it wouldn't be odd to offer it in a stock cam. The market is simply incapable of recognizing the value of the obvious until it's popularized. LG G2 in 2013 with thin bezels, Sharp in 2015 with 120 Hz screen, any manual controls in the camera app.

As for this term specifically – yes, big cameras are filled with the same kind of cancer, except that they're missing features to move you into a costlier model rather than because of lack of popularity of a given feature alone. It may as well be popular and yet still only available on the high-end cameras of a given vendor.

For a matter of fact, many phones don't even have a 16:9 sensor mode except for slowmo, since there usually isn't much to gain by analog cropping, while using the same sensor mode for both photos and videos reduces driver and tuning complexity. Moreover, some sensor vendors will provide you with analog cropped register presets, but will stick to the clock utilized by 4:3 mode of the same frame rate, reducing the chance of quality and energy improvements by a lot. (Not that higher clock has no benefits, it just isn't meant to increase the quality of a single frame and is likely to do the opposite)

To simplify the clock mechanics of a sensor, the rule of thumb is:
Higher clock – less rolling shutter distortion, availability of higher frame rate, but more noise per frame (even at the same exposure times).

S21 FE users aren't doing well

Despite very reasonable dynamic range when you press it...
https://fdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/25/sony-xperia-1-vii/rev13/camera/gsmarena_4204.jpg

... Xperia 1 VII seems to take every opportunity at burning shadows to black, for no good reason
https://fdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/25/sony-xperia-1-vii/rev13/camera/gsmarena_1109.jpg

https://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_1_vii-review-2828p5.php