[xeonmc]

Why couldn’t manufacturers proclaiming to espouse longevity, such as Fairphone, release the vendor source code for out-of-support hardware which are supposedly no longer relevant and so doesn’t matter if the competition can see the code? Or is it an issue of signing certificates?

[palata]

I wonder, but it could be that some of the hardware they use doesn't offer an open source firmware. Qualcomm for instance isn't super open.

IMO we should put in the law that manufacturers have to mainstream their device and provide a way to flash an updated firmware. There is no way they do it without being forced, because it's a pure source of cost for them.

That's how it works: companies optimise in the legal framework we give them. Regulations set that framework.

[immibis]

Contracts with vendors, usually. Vendors who make not much of their profit from Fairphone and would happily cut them off if they wanted terms like that.

There's a reason Pine64's devices (which are made out of parts with available public datasheets as much as possible - they don't do the software side of things) are mostly made with parts from a few generations ago, whose manufacturer doesn't care much any more.