Although I suspect a large portion of the cost is for the hardware, I’ve been wondering for awhile if they should fund the hardware and software separately. That would maybe keep the hardware costs a bit lower and allow people using a different device to still support the development of Phosh. And perhaps they could have an optional subscription to help with the continuing software development costs. I think it’s important to the phone’s long-term success that it is affordable for the average person and somewhat competitively priced. I believe we really do need more than one successful Linux phone for the ecosystem to thrive.
There are a number of advantages of this phone for me and reasons why the cost will always be higher than the Pinephone.
- Higher specs as has already been mentioned.
- Removable/replaceable modem and wifi cards.
- The wifi card has the firmware built in which was an extra cost but means there is no need for a blob to be transferred from the OS to use it.
- The screen uses the LM36922 to drive the LED backlight, hopefully meaning at the very least significantly reduced screen flicker when the brightness is lower than 100%. I’m not sure how this compares to the Pinephone but it’s important for me at least.
- Much more convenient kill switches than the Pinephone. Aesthetically, I kind of prefer the kill switches being hidden under the back cover, however, I honestly can’t see myself using them much on the Pinephone because of how inconvenient it is to switch them. I think it’s awesome they both have them though.
The Librem 5 adheres as strictly as possible to the FSF philosophy which is great, but it does mean some trade-offs. A bit off topic and I think someone mentioned this before but I would like to see someone (maybe System 76?) create a Linux phone at the other end of the spectrum from Purism. Performance over FSF and privacy/security ideals. I think that would round off the Linux phone market nicely.